Full text of "Mrs. Maybrick's own story; my fifteen lost years"

See other formats

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on Hbrary shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at |http : //books . google . com/|

??!S?!S!^BBPT^pTf^?'^P

;

\ '\ 7

FLORENCIC ELIZAUETII MAVERICK

J' *

• ■<

V ♦

a % • k •

/•

w " •■«

•j ^ ^ «i

i ¥ K * J $ ■

• to
• • •

MRS. MAYBRICK'S
OWN STORY

NY FIFTEEN LOST YEARS

FLORENCE ELIZABETH MAYBRICK

FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY

NSW YORK AND LONDON

1905

.> *

) .M il j l 1 ) 1

V •

J ' J ,

•I V

J 1

•■ I ■> J

-9»"«"

*>*siL-^/.-'

v\ .

; -^ \ •

' I

CONTENTS

PAGE

tion as to Identity of Meat-luice Bottle — Mis-
direction in Excluding CorroDoration of Prison-
er's Statement — Misdirections to Jury to Draw
Illegal Inferences — Misdirections Kegarding the
Medical Testimony — Conflict of Medical Opinion
— Misdirections as to Cause of Death— Misdirec-
tion to Ignore Medical Testimony — Misreception
of Evidence — Cruel Misstatement by Coroner —
Medical Evidence for the Prosecution — May-
brick Died a Natural Death— The Chief Witness
for the Prosecution — Medical Evidence for De-
fense — A Toxicolc^ical Study— Medical Weak-
ness of Prosecution — The Administration of
Arsenic — The Fly-paper Episode — How Mrs.
Maybrick Accounts for the Fly-papers — Admin-
istration of Arsenic not Proved — Intent to Mur-
der not Proved — Absence of Concealment by
Prisoner — Some Important Deductions from
Medical Testimony — Symptoms Due to Poison-,
ous Druffs — Death from Natural Causes — Prose-
cution's Deductions from Post-mortem Analysis
Misleading — Recapitulation of Legal Points, . 262

Mrs. Maybrick's Own Analysis op the Meat-
Juice Incident, 366

Memorials for Respite of Sentence— From the
Physicians of Liverpool — From the Bars of
Liverpool and London — From Citizens of Liver-
pool, 381

New Evidence.— Arsenic Sold to Maybrick by
Druggist — Arsenic Supplied to Maybrick by
Manufacturing Chemist — Depositions as to Mr.
Maybrick's Arsenic Habit— Justice Stephen's
Retirement, 384

Vlll

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Florence Elizabeth Maybrick, . . . Frontispiece

PACING PACK

The Late Dr. Helen Densmore, .... 32
Lord Charles Russell, 48

St. George's Hall, Liverpool, 52

Justice Fitz-James Stephen, 56

Baroness von Roques, 112

"""^Aylesbury Prison, 128

Miss Mary A. Dodge ("Gail Hamilton"), . 144

Right Hon. A. Akers-Douglas, M.P., . .216

Hon. James G. Blaine, 248

Hon. Robert T. Lincoln, 256

Hon. John Hay, 288

Hon. Joseph H. Choate, 320

Samuel V. Hayden, 352

Leonidas D. Yarrell, 368

FOREWORD

THE writing of this book has been to
me no joyful task, as its making has
been at the expense of much-needed rest
and peace of mind. In returning to my
dear native land after a long imprisonment,
I cherished the hope that I might as quiet-
ly as possible be permitted to take up the
threads of outward existence so cruelly
broken, little dreaming that trials hardly
less grievous than those left behind awaited
tne ; for no sooner had I touched these hos-
pitable shores, when I was met by the fear-
inspiring cry, " You must write a book —
you must give the world an account of your
sufiFerings" — as if one could never suffer
enough. My well-meaning friends could
hardly have known what they were asking
in forcing upon me a mental return to the

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

dread past. Solitary confinement in Wo-
king Prison (as the reader may learn from
these pages) was not such an elysium that
one should voluntarily desire to hark back
to it, nor is penal servitude in Aylesbury
an Arcadian dream. While within their
grim walls I did my best to exclude
from thought the world without; and
now that I am once again in the world
(though scarcely of it), my one desire to
shut out all the abhorrent things which
so-called " prison life " stands for has thus
far not only failed of realization, but, under
conditions even more trying than the re-
pressive prison regime (because of the free
and happy life all about, which it seemed
to poor me that I had some right to share),
I have been compelled by force of circum-
stance to return to my cast-ofif prison shell,
and live all the old heart-and-brain-crushing
life over again. However, my second " trial
and imprisonment," like the first, is at last

FOREWORD

drawing to a close; and I devoutly trust
that I shall be now permitted to enter upon
a long-coveted rest, and partake as I may
of those tempered joys which my country-
men by their beautiful sympathy have so
chivalrously endeavored to make possible
for me.

Theoretically my imprisonment termi-
nated on English soil, but so relentlessly
have the fates pursued me that I haye been
in nowise free quite up to the present mo-
ment. In Rouen, France, where I so-
journed at my mother's home for three
weeks, I was as much in durance to my
genial enemy, the ubiquitous reporter, as
when the English Government held me in
its inexorable grasp. Our cottage was
completely invested by him, and all ap-
proaches and exits held with a persistency
which, under other circumstances, might
well have extorted my admiration.

Then came the ever-to-be-remembered

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

sea voyage. I am a good sailor, and so the
physical discomforts that beset so many
were agreeably minimized ; but I could not
throw oflF the feeling that I was not yet free
— the limits of the ship were still all too
suggestive of the narrow exercise grounds
of Aylesbury prison; and, while the eye
could roam without hindrance, there came
upon me again and again an irresistible
desire^ which the rolling billows strenuous-
ly gainsaid, to make a dash for liberty.

Thereupon followed a couple of days at
the Holland House, New York, with the
same persistent reporter never absent.
After this experience, I was taken by the
kindest of friends to where nature is at
her loveliest and human hearts beat in
unison with their uplifting surroundings.
Beautiful Cragsmoor, with its wide reaches
of inspiring scenery, most appropriately
the summer home of an artistic colony, is
not too easy of access to mar a desire for

FOREWORD

seclusion, and a* greater antithesis to prison
walls than is afforded by this aerie can
hardly be imagined.

Here all things that on lower planes so
cruelly vex the spirit seem far away and
beneath. If only no publishers — however
benevolent — had entered this Eden, what
a paradise it could have been to me!
However, in spite of these dread task-
masters, my soul drank deeply of the elixir
so bountifully held to my lips ; and when
in the golden autumn all the noble woods
about robed themselves in such glory as
may be seen nowhere outside my beloved
native land — and perchance nowhere here
more ravishingly than in these Hudson
Valley uplands — the rapture of my heart,
so long starved within the narrowest and
crudest of confines, turned adoringly to
Him who has made this world so beautiful
for His children's eyes.
I need hardly be at pains to say to my

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

readers, that lessons in literary composition
form no part of the disciplinary curricu-
lum of Aylesbury; nay, the art of wri-
ting is distinctly discouraged there, as inter-
fering with the prescribed parliamentary
regime. Accordingly, when I set out to tell
my pitiful little story, I was told to look
at myself objectively ; then to pry into my-
self subjectively; then to regard both in
their relation to the outside world — to de-
scribe how this, that, or the other affected
me ; in short, as one of them, more deep
in science than others, expressed it, " We
want as much as possible of the psychology
of your prison life."

I surreptitiously looked up that awe-in-
spiring word in a dictionary, and found that
it refers to the soul, and that it was my soul
they wanted me to lay bare. I vehemently
protested that that belonged to my God,
and I had no right to expose it for daws to
peck at. But the publishers, with the aid

FOREWORD

of my friends, persuaded me that the pub-
lic would give me their tenderest regard,
and that possibly the humanities might be
furthered a bit if the story of a woman —
whatever might be her failings in other di-
rections — wholly guiltless of the terrible
charge of wilful murder, and for which in
her innocence she was made to suffer so
cruelly, be given in fullest heart detail to a
sympathetic world. So I have done what
I trust is best for all — spared myself as lit-
tle as possible, lest the picture fail from
suppression — and my dearest heart-hope
is that somewhat of good may come of it,
especially in behalf of those whom a dire
fate shall compel to follow in my steps,
with bruised spirits and bleeding feet.

Sketch of My Ancestry

I was bom at Mobile, Ala., September
3, 1862. In searching for some account of
my genealogy, I found a published letter of

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

Gail Hamilton's, who was ever one of my
most eloquent and steadfast champions,
and to whom I owe a debt of gratitude I
can never adequately express. From this
it appears that I am the great-great-grand-
daughter of Rev. Benjamin Thurston, a
graduate of Harvard College, who settled
at North Hampton, N. H., and of his wife,
Sarah Phillips, who was the sister of Joha
Phillips, who founded Phillips' Academy
in Exeter, endowed a professorship in
Dartmouth, and contributed funds to
Princeton ; and who was the aunt of Sam-
uel Phillips, who founded Phillips's Acad-
emy at Andover.

' The mother of Sarah Phillips was Eliza-
beth Green, and from her the name of
Elizabeth has come down in regular de-
scent to myself.

Elizabeth, daughter of Benjamin Thur-
ston and Sarah Phillips, married James

Milk Ingraham. Joseph H. Ingraham, of

SKETCH OF MY ANCESTRY

this family, gave to Portland, Me., for its
improvement, property now amounting in
value to millions — beautiful State Street,
the market, the property of the High
School, and much more. One of the In-
grahams was the wife of Philander Chase,
the first Bishop of Illinois, uncle of Sal-
mon P. Chase, who was Secretary of the
Treasury under Lincoln and Chief Justice
of the Supreme Court of the United
States. Of the Ingraham family was that
Commodore Ingraham who won laurels
for his country and himself by rescuing
Martin Koszatafrom the clutch of Austria.
Connected with the Ingrahams was that
Edward Preble, bom at Falmouth Neck,,
whose father served under Wolfe and was
wounded at Quebec; also that Comman-
der Preble whose achievement before
Tripoli was rewarded with a gold medal
and the thanks of Congress. Rev. John
Phillips and Thurston Ingraham, author

2 17

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

of " Why We Believe the Bible," both rec-
tors in the Protestant Episcopal Church,
were sons of James Milk Ingraham and
Elizabeth Thurston Ingraham. John In-
graham, son of the preceding, is rector of
Grace Church, St. Louis, Mo. His sister,
Elizabeth Thurston Ingraham, married
Darius Blake Holbrook, who was born in
Dorchester, Mass. His mother was a
Ridgeway. Her sister married a Quincy,
and was aunt to John Quincy Adams.
Mr. Holbrook was an originator of the
land grant for the Illinois Central Railroad
and its first president. He owned Cairo,
at the mouth of the Ohio, and was associ-
ated with Cyrus Field in laying the first
Atlantic cable. Caroline Elizabeth was
the only child of Darius Blake Holbrook
and Elizabeth Thurston Holbrook. She
married William G. Chandler, of the bank-
ing house of St. John Powers & Co., Mo-
bile, Ala. William G. Chandler's father

SKETCH OF MY ANCESTRY

was Daniel Chandler, a lawyer of high
standing in Georgia ; his mother was Sa-
rah Campbell, a sister of John A. Camp-
bell, at one time Assistant Secretary of
State for the Confederacy, and previously
judge of the Supreme Court of the United
States. Judge L. Q. C. Lamar, long a
United States Senator, and afterward a
justice of the Supreme Court, was near of
kin.

To William G. Chandler and Caroline
Elizabeth Holbrook Chandler two chil-
dren were born — Holbrook St. John and
Florence Elizabeth. Their father died in
1863, and their mother, on account of the
war, took the children abroad to be edu-
cated. The son died while pursuing his
medical studies.

As will be seen from the above sum-
mary of Gail Hamilton's statement, I am
descended, on both my paternal and my
maternal side for generations, from good

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

American stock. I was educated partly
in Europe and partly in America, under
the instruction of masters and governesses.
I was too delicate for college life. I lived
partly with my maternal grandmother,
Elizabeth Holbrook, of New York, and
partly with my mother, the Baroness von
Roques, whose home was abroad. When
not with them I was visiting or traveling
with friends. My life was much the same
as that of any other girl who enjoyed the
pleasures of youth with a happy heart. I
was very fond of tracing intricate designs
and copying the old-time churches and ca-
thedrals. My special pastime, however,
was riding, and this I could indulge in to
my heart's content when residing with my
stepfather. Baron Adolph von Roques,
who, now retired, was at that time a caval-
ry officer in the Eighth Cuirassier Regi-
ment of the German army and stationed at

Cologne.

SKETCH OF MY ANCESTRY

At the age of eighteen I married James
Maybrick, on the 27th of July, 1881, at St.
James Church, Piccadilly, London, and re-
turned to America, where we made our
home at Norfolk, Va. For business rea-
sons we settled in a suburb of Liverpool
called Aigworth. A son was born to us on
the 24th of March, 1882, and a daughter
on June 20, 1886.

Florence Elizabeth Maybrick.

CHAPTER ONE
Before the Trial

My Arrest

SLOWLY consciousness returned. I
opened my eyes. The room was in
darkness. All was still. Suddenly the
silence was broken by the bang of a
closing door which startled me out of
my stupor. Where was I? Why was I
alone ? What awful thing had happened ?
A flash of memory! My husband was
dead! I drifted once more away from
the things of sense. Then a voice, as if a
long way off, spoke. A feeling of pain and
distress shot through my body. I opened
my eyes in terror. Edwin Maybrick was
bending over me as I lay upon my bed.
He had my arms tightly gripped, and was

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

shaking me violently. " I want your keys
— do you hear? Where are your keys?"
he exclaimed harshly. I tried to form a
reply, but the words choked me, and once
more I passed into unconsciousness.

It is the dawn of a Sabbath day.* I am
still lying in my clothes, neglected and un-
cared for ; without food since the morning
of the day before. Consciousness came
and went. During one of these interludes
Michael Maybrick entered.

" Nurse," he said, " I am going up to
London. Mrs. Maybrick is no longer mis-
tress of this house. As one of the execu-
tors I forbid you to allow her to leave this
room. I hold you responsible in my ab-
sence."

He then left the room. What did he
mean? How dare he humble me thus in
the presence of a stranger?

Toward the night of the same day I said
to the nurse, " I wish to see my children."
She took no notice. My voice was weak,

♦May 12, 1889.

MY ARREST

and I thought perhaps she had not heard.
"Nurse," I repeated, "I want to see my
children." She walked up to my bed, and
in a cold, deliberate voice replied : " You
can not see Master James and Miss
Gladys. Mr. Michael Maybrick gave or-
ders that they were to leave the house
without seeing you." I fell back upon my
pillow, dazed and stricken, weak, helpless,
and impotent. Why was I treated thus?
My brain reeled in seeking a reply to this
query. At last I could bear it no longer,
and my soul cried out to God to let me
die. A third dreary night, and the day
broke once again. I was still prostrate.
The dull pain at my heart, the yearning for
my little children, was becoming unbear-
able, but I was dumb.

Suddenly the door opened and Dr.
Humphreys entered. He walked silently
to my bedside, felt my pulse, and without a
word left the room. A few minutes later I
heard the tramp of many feet coming up-
stairs. They stopped at the door. The

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

nurse advanced, and a crowd of men
entered. One of them stepped to the
foot of the bed and addressed me as fol-
lows:

" Mrs. Maybrick, I am superintendent of
the police, and I am about to say some-
thing to you. After I have said what I in-
tend to say, if you reply be careful how
you reply, because whatever you say may
be used as evidence against you. Mrs.
Maybrick, you are in custody on suspicion
of causing the death of your late husband,
James Maybrick, on the eleventh instant."
I made no reply, and the crowd passed out.

A Prisoner in My Own House

Was I going mad? Did I hear myself
accused of poisoning my husband ? Why
did not his brothers, who said they had his
confidence, tell the police what all his in-
timate friends knew, that he was an arsenic
eater? Why was I accused — I, who had
nursed him assiduously day and night until

A PRISONER IN MY OWN HOUSE

my strength gave out, who had engaged
trained nurses, and advised a consultation
of physicians, and had done all that lay in
my power to aid in his recovery? To
whom could I appeal in my extreme dis-
tress ? I lay ill and confined to my bed,
with two professional nurses attending me,
and with a policeman stationed in my
room, although there was not and could
not be the slightest chance of my escaping.
The officer would not permit the door to
be closed day or night, and I was denied in
my own house, even before the inquest, the
privacy accorded to a convicted prisoner.
I asked that a cablegram be sent to my
lawyers in New York. Inspector Baxen-
dale read it, and then said he did not con-
sider it of importance and should not send
it. I then implored Dr. Humphreys to ask
a friendly lawyer, Mr. R. S. Cleaver, of
Liverpool, to come out to see me. After
some delay Mr. Cleaver obtained a permit
to enter the house and undertook to repre-
sent me.

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

The fourth day came and went. On the
fifth day, May i6, the stillness of the house
was broken by the sound of hushed voices
and hurrying footsteps. "Nurse," I ex-
claimed, when I could no longer bear the
feeling of oppression that possessed me,
"is anything the matter?" She turned,
and in a cold, harsh voice replied, " The
funeral starts in an hour." "Whose fu-
neral?" I asked. " Your husband's," the
nurse exclaimed; *^but for you he would
have been buried on Tuesday." I stared
at her for a moment, and then, trembling
from head to foot, got out of bed and com-
menced with weak hands to dress myself.
The nurse looked alarmed, and came for-
ward. " Stand back 1 " I cried. " I will see
my husband before he is taken away."
She placed herself in front of me ; I pushed
her aside and confronted the policeman
at the door. " I demand to see my hus-
band," I exclaimed. "The law does not
permit a person to be treated as guilty
until she is proven so."

A PRISONER IN MY OWN HOUSE

He hesitated, and then said, "Follow
me." With tottering steps, supported by
the nurse, I was led into the adjoining
room. Upon the bed stood the coffin,
covered with white flowers. It was already
closed. I turned to the policeman and the
nurse. " Leave me alone with the dead."
They refused. I then knelt down at the
bedside, and God in His mercy spared my
reason by granting me, there and then, the
first tears which many days of suffering
had failed to bring. Death had wiped out
the memory of many things. I was thank-
ful to remember that I had stopped divorce
proceedings, and that we had become rec-
onciled for the children's sake. Calmed,
I arose and returned to my room. I sat
down near a window, still weeping. Sud-
denly the harsh voice of a nurse broke on
my ears : " If you wish to see the last of the
husband you have poisoned you had better
stand up. The funeral has started." I
stumbled to my feet and clutched at the
window-sill, where I stood rigid and tear-

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

less until the hearse had passed, and was
out of sight, and then I fainted.

When I recovered consciousness I asked
why my mother had not been sent for.
No answer was made, but a tardy sum-
mons was sent to her at Paris. When
she arrived she came to me at once.
What a meeting 1 She kissed me, and was
speaking a few loving words in French,
when the nurse interposed and said, " You
must speak in English," and the policeman
joined in with " I warn you, madam, that
I will write down all you say," and he pro-
duced paper and pencil. I then begged
my mother to go into Liverpool to see the
Messrs. Cleaver, who represented me, as
they would give her all the information she
required ; and then I cried out in the bit-
terness of my heart, " Mother, they all be-
lieve me guilty, but I swear to you I am
innocent." That night I had a violent at-
tack of hysteria. Two nurses and the po-
liceman held me down, and when my
mother, outraged by his presence, wished

AT WALTON JAIL

to take his place and send him from the
room, Nurse Wilson became insolent and
turned her out.

At Walton Jail

The next morning, Saturday, the i8th of
May, Dr. Hopper and Dr. Humphreys
visited me, to ascertain whether I was in a
condition to permit of formal proceedings
taking place in my bedroom. In a few
minutes they gave their consent. The
magistrates and others then came up-stairs.

There were present Colonel Bid well,
Mr. Swift (clerk), Superintendent Bryning,
and my lawyers, the Messrs. Cleaver, Dr.
Hopper, and Dr. Humphreys. I was fully
conscious, but too prostrate to make any
movement. Besides those in the room,
there were seated outside the policeman
and the nurse. Superintendent Bryning,
who had taken up his position at the foot
of the bed, said: "This person is Mrs.
Maybrick, charged with causing the death

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

of the late James Maybrick. She is
charged with causing his death by admin-
istering poison to him. I understand that
her consent is given to a remand, and
therefore I need not introduce nor give
evidence."

Mr. Swift : " You ask for a remand for
eight days?"

Mr. Arnold Cleaver: " I appear for the
prisoner."

Colonel Bidwell : " Very well ; I consent
to a remand. That is all."

These gentlemen then departed. The
police were in such a hurry to prefer the
formal charge, they could not; wait until the
doctors should certify that I was in a fit
state to be taken to the court in the ordi-
nary way. The nurse then told me I must
get up and dress. I prayed that my chil-
dren might be sent for to bid me good-by —
but I was peremptorily refused. I begged
to gather together some necessary per-
sonal apparel, only to meet with another
refusal. I was hurried away with such un-

)

AT WALTON JAIL

seemly haste, that even my hand-bag with
my toilet articles was left behind. My
mother implored to be allowed to say good-
by, but was denied. She had gone up to
her bedroom, so she tells me, which looked
out on the front, to try and see my face as
they put me in the carriage, when they
turned the key and locked her in. After
I had gone a policeman unlocked the door.
After a two hours' drive we arrived at
Walton Jail, in the suburbs of Liverpool.
I shuddered as I looked at the tall, gloomy
building. A bell was ringing, and the big
iron gates swung back and allowed us to
pass in. I was received by the governor
and immediately led away by a female
warder. We crossed a small courtyard and
stopped at a door which she unlocked and
relocked. Then we passed down a narrow
passage to a door that led into a dark,
gloomy room termed the " Reception." A
bench ran along each side, a bare wooden
table stood in the middle, a weighing-ma-
chine by the door, with a foot measure be-
3 33

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

side it. A female warder asked me to
give up any valuables in my possession.
These consisted of a watch, two diamond
rings, and a brooch. They were entered
in a book. Then I was asked to stand
upon the weighing-machine, and my weight
was duly noted. These formalities com-
pleted, I was led through a building into a
cell especially set apart for sick prisoners.
The escort locked me in, and, utterly ex-
hausted, stricken with a sense of horror and
degradation, I sank upon the stone floor,
reiterating, until consciousness left me,
" Oh, my God, help me — ^help me ! "

Alone

When I opened my eyes I was in bed
and alone. I gazed around. At the bed-
side was a chair with a china cup contain-
ing milk, and a plate of bread upon it.
The cell was bare. The light struggled
in dimly through a dirty, barred window.
The stillness was appalling, and I felt be-

ALONE

numbed — a sense of terrible oppression
weighed me down. If only I could hear
once more the sound of a friendly voice !
If only some one would tell whose diabol-
ical mind had conceived and directed sus-
picion against me !

I remained in the cell three days, when
my lawyer visited me. He arranged that I
was to have a room especially set apart for
prisoners awaiting trial who can afford to
pay five shillings (^1.25) weekly, for the
additional comfort of a table, an arm-chair,
and a wash-stand. Had I not been able to
do so I should have been consigned to an
ordinary prison cell, and my diet would
have been the same as that of convicted
prisoners. Instead, my food was sent from
a hotel outside. I was locked in this room
for twenty-two hours out of the twenty-four.
The only time I was permitted to leave it
was for chapel in the morning and an hour's
exercise in the afternoon in the prison
yard. The stillness, unbroken by any
sound from the outside world, got on my

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

nerves, and I wanted to scream, if only to
hear my own voice. The unnatural con-
finement, without any one to speak to, was
torture. The governor, the doctor, and
the chaplain, it is true, came around every
morning, but their visits were of such short
duration, and so formal in their nature,
that it was impossible to derive much re-
lief from conversation with them.

The Coroner's Inquest

On the 28th of May the Coroner's inquest
was held, but I was not well enough to at-
tend. I was represented by my legal ad-
visers. On the 3d of June I was still too
ill to appear before the court. Mr. W. S.
Barrett, as magistrate, accompanied by Mr.
Swift, the clerk, held a Magisterial Court at
Walton Jail. Mr. R. S. Cleaver did not
attend, having consented to the police ob-
taining another remand for a week. Only
one newspaper reporter was allowed to be
present. I was accompanied to the visit-

A PLANK FOR A BED

tors' room by a female warder, and silently
took a seat at the foot of a long table.
I was quite composed. Superintendent
Bryning rose from his seat at the end of
the room and said :

" This person, sir, is Mrs. Maybrick, who
is charged with the murder of her husband,
at Aigburth, on the nth of last month.
I have to ask that you remand her until
Wednesday next."

Mr. Swift: ''Mr. Cleaver, her solicitor,
has sent me a note in which he consents to
a remand until Wednesday.'*

Mr. Barrett : " If there is no objection
she will be remanded until Wednesday
morning."

A Plank for a Bed

The magistrate then signed the docu-
ment authorizing the remand, and I with-
drew. On the 5th of June the adjourned
inquest was held, and I was taken from jail
at half-past eight in the morning to the

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

Coroner's Court in a cab, accompanied by
Dr. O'Hagan, a female attendant, and a
policeman. I was taken into the ante-room
for the purpose of being identified by the
witnesses for the prosecution. I was not
taken into court, but at three o'clock Mr.
Holbrook Gaskell, a magistrate, attended
for the purpose of granting another re-
mand, pending the result of the inquest,
and again no evidence was given in my
presence. I was taken to the county police
station. Lark Lane. I passed the night in
a cell which contained only a plank board
as a bed. It was dark, damp, dirty^ and
horrible. A policeman, taking pity on me,
brought me a blanket to lie on. In the ad-
joining cell, in a state of intoxication, two
men were raving and cursing throughout
the night. I had no light — there was no
one to speak to. I was kept there three
days, until the coroner's jury had returned
their verdict. A greengrocer near by,
named Mrs. Pretty, to whom I had occa-
sionally given orders for fruit, sent me in a

VERDICT OF THE CORONER'S JURY

daily gift of her best with a note of sympa-
thy-a deed all the more striking in its
generosity and nobleness, since the charity
of none other of my own sex had reached
to that degree of justice to regard me as in-
nocent until proven guilty.

The Verdict of the Coroner's Jury

On the 6th of June I was again driven
to Garston to hear the coroner's verdict.
There was an elaborate array of lawyers,
reporters, and witnesses, as well as many
spectators.

I waited in the ante-room until the coro-
ner's jury had summed up. The jury con-
sisted mostly of gentlemen who at one time
had been guests in my own house. Of all
former friends present, there was only one
who had the moral courage to approach
me and shake my hand. Throughout the
time I sat awaiting the call to appear before
the coroner he remained beside me, speak-
ing words of encouragement. But the

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

others, who, without a word of evidence in
my defense, had already judged and con-
demned me, passed by on the other side,
for had they not already judged and con-
demned me?

When my name was called a dead
hush pervaded the court, and the coroner
said:

" Have you agreed upon your verdict,
gentlemen ? "

The Foreman : " We have."

Q. "Do you find that death resulted
from the administration of an irritant poi-
son?"

A. " Unanimously."

Q. " Do you say by whom that poison
was administered ? "

A. "By twelve to one we decide that the
poison was administered by Mrs. May-
brick."

Q. " Do you find that the poison was ad-
ministered with the intent of taking life ? "

A. "Twelve of us have come to that
conclusion."

VERDICT OF THE CORONER'S JURY

The Coroner : " That amounts to a ver-
dict of murder."

Then the requisition was made out in
the following terms :

"That James Maybrick, on the nth of
May, 1889, 1^^ the township of Garston, died
frorn the effects oi an irritant poison ad-
ministered to him by Florence Elizabeth
Maybrick, and so the jurors say: that the
said Florence Elizabeth Maybrick did wil-
fully, feloniously, and of malice afore-
thought kill and murder the said James
Maybrick."

I was then driven back to the Lark Lane
Police Station, locked up, and remained
the night. The next day I was returned to
Walton Jail. How shall I describe my feel-
ings ? Mere words are utterly inadequate
to do so. Not only was my sense of justice
and fair play outraged, but it seemed to me
a frightful danger to personal safety if the
police, on the mere gossip of servants, and
where a doctor had been unable to as-
sign the cause of death, could go into a

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

home and take an inmate into custody in
the way I have shown.

On the 13th of June I was brought be-
fore the magistrates, and for the first time
evidence was given in my presence. I had
been driven over to the court-house the
evening before, and had passed the night
there in charge of a policeman's daughter,
who remained in the room with me. Her
father kept watch on the other side of the
door. That night, on going to bed, as I
knelt weary and lonely to say my prayers,
I felt a hand on my shoulder and a tearful
voice said, softly^ " Let me hold your hand,
Mrs. Maybrick, and let me say my prayers
with you." A simple expression of sjmipa-
thy, but it meant so much to me at such a
time.

The Doctors Disagree

At half-past eight I was taken to a room
adjoining the court, where, in charge of a
female warder and a policeman, I awaited
my call. I then passed into the court, where

THE DOCTORS DISAGREE

two magistrates, Sir William B. Forwood
and Mr. W. S. Barrett, sat officially to hear
the evidence. When the testimony had
been given the court adjourned.

When I rose to leave the court, in order
to reach the door, I had to meet face to face
well-dressed women spectators at the back,
and the moment I turned around these
started hissing me. The presiding justice
immediately shouted to the officer on duty
to shut the door, while the burly figures of
several policemen, who moved toward the
hostile spectators, effectually put an end to
the outburst. It was amid such scenes, and
this sort of preparation for my ordeal, that
on the following day, the 14th of June, the
Magisterial Inquiry was resumed, and the
evidence connected with the charge of
murder gone into. On conclusion of the
testimony the magistrates retired, and after
a brief consultation returned into court.

Sir William Forwood : " Our opinion is
that this is a case which ought to be de-
cided by jury.''

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

Mr. Pickford (my counsel) : " If that is
clearly the opinion of the Bench I shall not
occupy their time by going into the defense
now, because I understand, whatever de-
fense may be put forward, the Bench may
think it right for a jury to decide."

The Chairman: " Yes, we think so."

I was then ordered to stand up and was
fonnally charged in the usual manner.

I replied : " I reserve my defense."

Sir William Forwood made answer:
" Florence Elizabeth Maybrick, it is our
duty to commit you to take your trial at
the ensuing Assizes for wilful murder of
the late James Maybrick."

I was then remanded into custody.

I found it difficult to understand why
these magistrates committed me to trial for
murder on that evidence. There was cer-
tainly not sufficient evidence that the cause
of death was arsenic. The doctors could
not say so. No arsenic had been found by
the analyst in the stomach, the appearance
of which at the post-mortem^ Dr. Hum-

THE DOCTORS DISAGREE

phreys said, was "consistent" with either
poisoning or ordinary congestion of the
stomach ; but, after examination, a minute
quantity of arsenic, certainly not enough to
cause death, was detected in the liver, the
appearance of which. Dr. Humphreys said,
showed no evidence of any irritant poison.
On this point Dr. Carter agreed with Dr.
Humphreys, "but in a more positive man-
ner," while Dr. Barron did not exactly
agree with Dr. Carter.

The analyst had found both arsenic and
"traces" of arsenic, in some bottles and
things which had been found in the house
after death, as to which, where they came
from, or who had put them there, no one had
any knowledge. This is the evidence upon
which I was committed. Justice Stephen,
in addressing the grand jury, even thus early
showed a predisposition against me, due at
this time, no doubt, to the sensational re-
ports in the press. A true bill was found,
and I was brought to trial before him on
the 31st of July.

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

Letters from Walton Jail

The six • weeks intervening before my
trial were very terrible. The mental strain
was incessant, and I suffered much from in-
somnia. The stress and confinement were
telling on my health, as was the separation
from my children. I insert here two ex-
tracts from letters, written by me, from Wal-
ton Jail. One is to my mother, dated the
2 ist of July, 1889, a few days before my trial :

" I am not feeling very well. This fear-
ful strain and the necessity for continued
self-control is beginning to tell upon me.
But I am not in the least afraid. I shall
show composure, dignity and fortitude to
the last."

The following is an extract from a letter
I wrote to a friend on June 27, before my
trial on July 31:

" I have made my peace with God. I
have forgiven unreservedly all those who
have ruined and forsaken me. To-morrow
I partake of the Holy Communion with a

LORD RUSSELL'S OPINION

clear conscience, and I place my faith in
God's mercy.

" God give me strength is my constant
prayer. I feel so lonely — as if every hand
were against me. To think that for three
or four days I must be unveiled before
all those uncharitable eyes. You can not
think how awful it appears to me. So far
the ordeal has been all anticipation ; then it
will be stern reality — which always braces
the nerves and courage.

" I have seen in the Liverpool Post the
judge's address on the prosecution to the
jury, and it is enough to appal the stoutest
heart. I hear the police are untiring and
getting up the case against me regardless of
expense.

" Pray for me, my friend, for the darkest
days of my life are now to be lived through.
I trust in God's justice, whatever I may be
in the sight of man."

Lord Russell's Opinion

I received many visits from my lawyers,
the Messrs. Cleaver, and just before the
trial one from my leading counsel, Sir

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

Charles Russell, later Lord Russell of
Killowen, Lord Chief Justice of England.
The following statement made by him rela-
tive to this visit may interest my readers :

" I will make no public statement of what
my personal belief is as to Mrs. Maybrick's
guilt or innocence, but I will tell you, who
have stood by her all these years, that, per-
plexed with the instructions in the brief, I
took what was an unusual step : I went to
see her in prison before her trial, and ques-
tioned her there to the best of my ability
for the purpose of getting the truth out of
her. During the whole seven days of her
trial I made careful observation of her de-
meanor, and since her imprisonment I have
availed myself of my judicial right to visit
her at Aylesbury Prison ; and, making the
best use of such opportunities of arriving
at a just conclusion about her own self-con-
sciousness, I decided in my own mind that
it never for a moment entered her mind to
do any bodily injury to her husband. On
the last occasion that I saw her I told her
so, as I felt it would and did give the poor
woman some comfort."

LORD CHARLES RUSSELL, Q.C..
Late Lord Chief Justice of EnRland, Mrs. Msyhrick"!

PUBLIC CONDEMNS ME UNHEARD

The Public Condemns Me Unheard

The day preceding my trial found me
calm in spirit, and in a measure prepared
for the awful ordeal before me. Up to
that time I had shown a composure that
astonished every one. Indeed, some went
so far as to say I was without feeling.
Perhaps I was toward their kind. I would
have responded to sympathy, but never to
distrust. At that time I was suspected by
all — or, rather, people were not sufficiently
just to content themselves with suspicions;
they condemned me outright, and, unheard,
struck at a weak, defenseless woman ; and
this upon what is now generally admitted
to have been insufficient evidence to sus-
tain the indictment.

CHAPTER TWO

The Trial

The Injustice of Trying the Case at

Liverpool

MY trial was set for the 31st of July
in St. George's Hall, Liverpool.
Immediately after nine o'clock on that day,
the part of the building which is open to
the general public was filled by a well-
dressed audience, including many of my
one-time friends. During all the days of
my trial, I am told, Liverpool society
fought for tickets. Ladies were attire'd as
for a matinee, and some brought their lunch-
eons that they might retain their seats.
Many of them carried opera-glasses, which
they did not hesitate to level at me. The
Earl of Sef ton occupied a seat on the bench
with the judge, and among the audience
were many public and city men and judicial

INJUSTICE OF LIVERPOOL TRIAL

officers. The press had for two months sup-
plied nourishment in the form of the most
sensational stories about me, to feed the
morbid appetite of the public. The excite-
ment ran so high that the Liverpool crowds
even hissed me as I was driven through
the streets. It was a mockery of justice to
hold such a trial in such a place as Liver-
pool, at such a time, by a common jury;
and it was a mockery of common sense to
expect that any Liverpool common jury
could, when they got into the jury-box, dis-
miss from their minds all they had heard
and seen. In a letter which I wrote to my
mother, when in Walton Jail, on the 28th
of June, about a month before the trial, I
said: "I sincerely hope Messrs. Cleaver
will arrange for my trial to take place in
London. I shall receive an impartial ver-
dict there, which I can not expect from a
jury in Liverpool, whose minds will virtu-
ally be made up before any evidence is
heard." Owing, however, to a lack of
funds this hope was not realized.

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

I was at this time alone, utterly forsaken,
and the only persons to whom I could look
for protection and advice were my lawyers,
Messrs. Cleaver.

At half-past eight on the morning of
my trial, a black van was driven up to the
side door, in the fore part of which were
already confined the male prisoners await-
ing trial. I was placed in the rear, a female
warder stepped in, the door was shut, and
I felt as if I were already buried. A crowd
witnessed my departure from Walton Jail,
and a larger one was assembled outside St.
George's Hall. But I was conducted into
the building without attracting attention.

At ten o'clock I heard a blast of trum-
pets that heralded the judge's entrance into
court. Shortly after my name was called,
and, accompanied by a male and a female
warder, I ascended slowly the stone stair-
case from the cells leading to the dock. I
was calm and collected in manner, although
aware of the gravity of my position. But
the consciousness of innocence, and a strong

52 •

3 I

AN UNEXPECTED VERDICT

faith in Divine support, made me confident
that strength would be given to endure the
awful ordeal before me.

In reply to the Clerk of Arraigns, who
read the charge against me of " feloniously
and wilfully murdering my husband, James
Maybrick," I answered " Not guilty/' It is
customary in criminal courts in England
to compel a prisoner to stand in the dock
during the whole trial, but I was provided
with a seat by recommendation of the pris-
on doctor, as I suffered from attacks of
faintness, though against this humane de-
parture a great public outcry was raised.

The counsel engaged in the case were
Mr. Addison, Q.C., M.P. (now judge at the
Southwark County Court), Mr. McConnell,
and Mr. Swift, for the prosecution; Sir
Charles Russell, assisted by Mr. Pickford
and Messrs. Cleaver, for the defense.

An Unexpected Verdict

When the trial began there was a strong
feeling against me, but as it proceeded, and

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

the fact was made clear that Mr. Maybrick
had long been addicted to taking large
quantities of arsenic, coupled with the evi-
dence, to quote Sir Charles Russell, (i) that
there was no proof of arsenical poisoning,
(2) that there was no proof that arsenic was
administered to him by me, the prejudice
against me gradually changed, until, at the
close of the trial, there was a complete re-
vulsion of sentiment, and my acquittal was
confidently expected.

When the jury retired to consider their
verdict I was taken below, and here my so-
licitor came to speak to me ; but the ten-
sion of mind was so great I do not recall
one word that he said.

After what seemed to me an age, but
was in reality only thirty-eight minutes,
the jury returned into court and took their
places in the jury-box. I was recalled to
the dock. When I stood up to hear the
verdict I had an intuition that it was unfa-
vorable. Every one looked away from me,
and there was a stillness in court that could

AN UNEXPECTED VERDICT

be felt. Then the Clerk of Arraigns arose
and said :

" Have you agreed upon the verdict, gen-
tlemen ? "
We have/'

And do you find the prisoner guilty
of the murder of James Maybrick or not
guilty?"

The Foreman : " Guilty."

A prolonged " Ah ! " strangely like the
sighing of wind through a forest, sounded
through the court. I reeled as if struck a
blow and sank upon a chair. The Clerk
of Arraigns then turned to me and said:
" Florence Elizabeth Maybrick, you have
been found guilty of wilful murder. Have
you anything to say why the court should
not pronounce sentence upon you accord-
ing to the law?"

I arose, and with a prayer for strength, I
clasped the rail of the dock in front of me,
and said in a low voice, but with firmness:
" My lord, everything has been against me ;
I am not guilty of this crime."

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

The Judge's Sentence

These were the last words which the law
permitted me to speak. Mr. Justice Ste-
phen then assumed the full dress of the
criminal judge — the black cap — and pro-
nounced the sentence of the court in these
words :

" Prisoner at the bar, I am no longer able
to treat you as being innocent of the dread-
ful crime laid to your charge. You have
been convicted by a jury of this city, after
a lengthy and most painful investigation,
followed by a defense which was in every
respect worthy of the man. The jury has
convicted you, and the law leaves me no
discretion, and I must pass the sentence
of the law :

" The court doth order you to be taken
from hence to the place from whence you
came, and from thence to the place of exe-
cution, and that you be hanged by the neck
until you are dead, and that your body be
afterward buried within the precincts of
the prison in which you shall be confined
after your conviction. And may the Lord
have mercy upon your soul 1 "

IN THE SHADOW OF DEATH

Utterly stunned I was removed from the
court to Walton Jail, there to be confined
until this sentence of the law should be
carried into effect.

The mob, as the Liverpool public was
styled by the press, before they had heard
or read a word of the defense had hissed
me when I entered the court; and now,
that they had heard or read the evidence,
cheered me as I drove away in the prison-
van, and hissed and hooted the judge, who
with difficulty gained his carriage.

In the Shadow of Death

In all the larger local English prisons
there is one room, swept and ready, the
sight of which can not fail to stir unwonted
thoughts. The room is large, with barred
windows, and contains only a bed and a
chair. It is the last shelter of those whom
the law declares to have forfeited their
lives. Near by is a small brick building
in the prison-yard, that has apparently

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

nothing to connect it with the room;
yet they are joined by a sinister sug-
gestion.

For nearly three terrible weeks I was
confined in this cell of the condemned, to
taste the bitterness of death under its most
appalling and shameful aspect. I was care-
fully guarded by two female warders, who
would gladly have been spared the task.
They might not read nor sleep; at my
meals, through my prayers, during every
moment of agony, they still watched on and
rarely spoke. Many have asked me what
my feelings were at that awful time. I re-
member little in the way of details as to my
state of mind. I was too overwhelmed for
either analytic or collective thought. Con-
scious of my innocence, I had no fear of
physical death, for the love of my Heav-
enly Father was so enveloping that death
seemed to me a blessed escape from a world
in which such an unspeakable travesty of
justice could take place; while I peti-
tioned for a reconsideration of the verdict,

IN THE SHADOW OF DEATH

it was wholly for the sake of my mother
and my children.

I knew nothing of any public efforts for
my relief. I was held fast on the wheels of
a slow-moving machine, hypnotized by the
striking hours and the flight of my num-
bered minutes, with the gallows staring me
in the face. The date of my execution was
not told me at Walton Jail, but I heard aft-
erward that it was to have taken place on
the 26th of August. On the 22d, while I
was taking my daily exercise in the yard
attached to the condemned cell, the govern-
or, Captain Anderson, accompanied by
the chief matron, entered. He called me
to him, and, with a voice which — all honor
to him — trembled with emotion, said :

" Maybrick, no commutation of sentence
has come down to-day, and I consider it
my duty to tell you to prepare for death."

"Thank you, governor," I replied; "my
conscience is clear. God's will be done."

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

Commutation of Sentence

He then walked away and I returned to
my cell. The female warder was weeping"
silently, but I was calm and spent the ear-
ly part of the night in my usual prayers.
About midnight exhausted nature could
bear no more, and I fainted. I had barely
regained consciousness when I heard the
shuffle of feet outside, the click of the key
in the lock — that warning catch in the slow
machinery of my doom. I sprang up, and
with one supreme effort of will braced my-
self for what I believed was the last act of
my life. The governor and a chaplain en-
tered, followed by a warder. They read
my expectation in my face, and the gov-
ernor, hastening forward, exclaimed in an
agitated voice: "It is well; it is good
news!" When I opened my eyes once
more I was lying in bed in the hospital,
and I remained there until I was taken to
Woking Convict Prison.

CHAPTER THREE
In Solitary Confinement

Removal to Woking Prison

ON the morning of the 29th of August
I was hastily awakened by a female
warder, who said that orders had come
down from the Home Office for my removal
that day to a convict prison.

When I left, the governor was standing
at the gate, and, with a kindliness of voice
which I deeply appreciated, told me to be
brave and good.

A crowd was in waiting at the station.
I was roughly hustled through it into a
third-class carriage.

The only ray of light that penetrated
those dark hours of my journey came from
an American woman. God bless her,

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

whoever she is or wherever she is! At
every station that the train stopped she got
out and came to the carriage door and
spoke words of sympathy and comfort.
She was the first of my countrywomen to
voice to me the protest that swelled into
greater volume as the years rolled by.

As the train drew up at Woking station a
crowd assembled. Outside stood a cab, to
which I was at once conducted, and we
drove through lovely woods; the scent of
flowers was wafted by the breeze into what
seemed to be a hearse that was bearing me
on toward my living tomb.

As we approached the prison the great
iron gate swung wide, and the cab drove
silently into the yard. There I descended.
The governor gave an order, and a woman
— who I afterward found was assistant
superintendent — came forward. Accom-
panied by her and an officer, I was led
across a near-by yard to a building which
stood somewhat apart from the others and
is known as the infirmary. There a princi-

THE CONVICT UNIFORM

pal matron received me, and the assistant
superintendent and the chief matron re-
turned to their quarters.

The Convict Uniform

In the grasp of what seemed to me a hor-
rible nightmare, I found myself in a cell
with barred windows, a bed, and a chair.
Without, the stillness of death reigned. I
remained there perhaps half an hour when
the door opened and I was commanded by
a female warder to follow her. In a daze
I obeyed mechanically. We crossed the
same yard again and entered a door that
led into a room containing only a fireplace,
a table, and a bath. Here I was told to
take off my clothes, as those I had traveled
in had to be sent back to the prison at Liv-
erpool, where they belonged.

When I was dressed in the uniform to
which the greatest stigma and disgrace is
attached, I was told to sit down. The
warder then stepped quickly forward, and
with a pair of scissors cut off my hair to the

. I

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

nape of my neck. This act seemed, above
all others, to bring me to a sense of my
degradation, my utter helplessness; and
the iron of the awful tragedy, of which I
was the innocent victim, entered my soul.
I was then weighed and my height taken.
My weight was one hundred and twelve
pounds, and my height five feet three
inches.

Once more I was bidden to: follow my
guide. We recrossed the yard and entered
the infirmary. Here I was locked in the
cell already mentioned. At last I could be
alone after the anguish and torture of the
day. I prayed for sleep that I might lose
consciousness of my intolerable anguish.
But sleep, that gentle nurse of the sad and
suffering, came not. What a night 1 I
shudder even now at the memory of it
Physically exhausted, smarting with the
thought of the cruel, heartless way in which
I had been beaten down and trodden under
foot, I felt that mortal death would have
been more merciful than the living death

IN SOLITARY CONFINEMENT

to which I was condemned. In the adjoin-
ing cell an insane woman was raving and
weeping throughout the night, and I won-
dered whether in the years to come I should
become like her.

The next day I was visited by the govern-
or on his official rounds. Then the doc-
tor came and made a medical examination,
and ordered me to be detained in the infir-
mary until further orders. My mind is a
blank as to what happened for some time
afterward. My next remembrance is being
told by a coarse-looking, harsh-spoken fe-
male warder to get ready to go into the
prison. Once more • I was led across the
big yard, and then I stood within the walls
that were to be for years my tomb. Out-
side the sun was shining and the birds were
singing.

In Solitary Confinement

Without, picture a vast outline of frown-
ing masonry. Within, when I had passed
the double outer gates and had been locked
5 65

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

out and locked in in succession, I found
myself in a central hall, from which ran
cage-like galleries divided into tiers and
landings, with a row of small cells on either
side. The floors are of stone, the landings
of slate, the railings of steel, and the stairs
of iron. Wire netting is stretched over the
lowest tier to prevent prisoners from throw-
ing themselves over in one of those frenzies
of rage and despair of which every prison
has its record. Within their walls can be
found, above all places, that most degra-
ding, heart-breaking product of civilization,
a human automaton. All will, all initiative,
all individuality, all friendship, all the
things that make human beings attractive
to one another, are absent. Suffering there
is dumb, and when it goes beyond endur-
ance — alas !

I followed the warder to a door, perhaps
not more than two feet in width. She un-
locked it and said, " Pass in.*' I stepped
.forward, but started back in horror.
Through the open door I saw, by the dim

IN SOLITARY CONFINEMENT

light of a small window that was never
cleaned, a cell seven feet by four.

Oh, don't put me in there!" I cried,

I can not bear it."

For answer the warder took me rough-
ly by the shoulder, gave me a push, and
shut the door. There was nothing to sit
upon but the cold slate floor. I sank to
my knees. I felt suffocated. It seemed
that the walls were drawing nearer and
nearer together, and presently the life
would be crushed out of me. I sprang to
my feet and beat wildly with my hands
against the door. " For God's sake let me
out ! Let me out ! " But my voice could
not penetrate that massive barrier, and ex-
hausted I sank once more to the floor. I
can not recall those nine months of solitary
confinement without a feeling of horror.
My cell contained only a hammock rolled
up in a corner, and three shelves let into the
wall-^no table nor stool. For a seat I was
compelled to place my bedclothes on the
floor.

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

The Daily Routine

No one can realize the horror of solitary
confinement who has not experienced it.
Here is one day's routine: It is six o'clock;
I arise and dress in the dark ; I put up my
hammock and wait for breakfast. I hear
the ward officer in the gallery outside. I
take a tin plate and a tin mug in my hands
and stand before the cell door. Presently
the door opens ; a brown, whole-meal, six-
ounce loaf is placed upon the plate ; the tin
mug is taken, and three-quarters of a pint
of gruel is measured in my presence, when
the mug is handed back in silence, and the
door is closed and locked. After I have
taken a few mouthfuls of bread I begin to
scrub my cell. A bell rings and my door
is again unlocked- No word is spoken,
because I know exactly what to do. I
leave my cell and fall into single file, three
paces in the rear of my nearest fellow con-
vict. All of us are alike in knowing what
we have to do, and we march away silently

THE DAILY ROUTINE

to Divine service. We are criminals under
punishment, and our keepers march us like
dumb cattle to the worship of God. To
me the twenty minutes of its duration were
as an oasis in a weary desert. When it
came to an end I felt comforted, and always
a little more resigned to my fate. Chapel
over, I returned directly to my cell, for I
was in solitary confinement, and might not
enjoy the privilege of working in company
with my prison companions.

Work I must, but I must work alone.
Needlework and knitting fall to my lot.
My task for the day is handed to me, and I
sit in my cell plying my needle, with the
consciousness that I must not indulge in
an idle moment, for an unaccomplished
task means loss of marks, and loss of marks
means loss of letters and visits. As chapel
begins at 8 130 I am back in my cell soon
after nine, and the requirement is that I
shall make one shirt a day — certainly not
less than five shirts a week. If I am obsti-
nate or indolent, I shall be reported by the

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

ward officer, and be brought to book with
punishment — perhaps reduced to a diet of
bread and water and total confinement in
my cell for twenty-four hours. If I am
faint, weak, or unwell, I may be excused
the full performance of my task ; but there
must be no doubt of my inability. In such
case it is for me to have my name entered
for the prison doctor, and obtain from him
the indulgence that will remit a portion of
my prescribed work to three or four shirts.
However, as I am well, I work automat-
ically, closely, and with persistence. Then
comes ten o'clock, and with it the governor
with his escort. He inspects each cell, and
if all is not as it should be, the prisoner will
hear of it. There is no friendly greeting
of "Good-morning" nor parting "Good-
night" within those gloomy walls. The
tone is formal and the governor says:
" How are you, Maybrick? Any com-
plaints? Do you want anything?" and
then he passes on. Then I am again alone

with my work and my brooding thoughts.

THE EXERCISE HOUR

I never made complaints. One but adds
to one's burden by finding causes for com-
plaint. With the coming and the going
of the governor the monotony returns to
stagnation.

The Exercise Hour

Presently, however, the prison bell rings
again. I know what the clangor means,
and mechanically lay down my work. It
is the hour for exercise, and I put on my
bonnet and cape. One by one the cell
doors of the ward are opened. One by one
we come out from our cells and fall into
single file. Then, with a ward officer in
charge, we march into the exercise yard.
We have drawn up in line, three paces
apart, and this is the form in which we
tramp around the yard and take our exer-
cise. This yard is perhaps forty feet
square, and there are thirty-five of us to
expand in its "freedom." The inclosure
is oppressively repulsive. Stone-flagged,
hemmed within ugly walls, it gives one a

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

hideous feeling of compression. It seems
more like a bear-pit than an airing ground
for human beings. But I forget that we
are not here to have things made easy,
comfortable, and pleasant for us. We are
here to be punished, to be scourged for our
crimes and misdeeds. Can you wonder
that human nature sometimes revolts and
dares even prison rigor? Human instincts
may be suppressed, but not wholly crushed.

There were at Woking two yards in
which flowers and green trees were visible,
but it was only in after years that I was per-
mitted to take my exercise in these yards,
and then only half an hour on Sunday.

When the one hour for exercise is over,
in a file as before, we tramp .back to our
work. Confined as we are for twenty-two
hours in our narrow, gloomy cells, the ex-
ercise, dull as it is, is our only opportunity
for a glimpse of the sky and for a taste of
outdoor life, and affords our only relief from
an otherwise almost unbearable day.

THE MIDDAY MEAL

The Midday Meal

At noon the midday meal. The first
sign of its approach is the sound of the fa-
tigiae party of prisoners bringing the food
from the kitchen into the ward. I hear
the ward officer passing with the weary
group from ceU to cell, and presently she
will reach my door. My food is handed to
me, then the door is closed and double
locked* In the following two hours, hav-
ing finished my meal, I can work or read.
At two o'clock the fatigue party again goes
on its mechanical round ; the cell door is
again unlocked, this time for the collection
of dinner-cans. The meal of each prisoner
is served out by weight, and the law allows
her to claim her full quantity to the utter-
most fraction of an ounce. She is even en-
titled to see it weighed if she fancies it falls
short. Work is then resumed until five
o'clock, when gruel and bread is again
served, as at breakfast, with half an hour
for its disposal. From that time on until

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

seven o'clock more work, when again is
heard the clang of the prison bell, and with
it comes the end of our monotonous day.
I take down my hammock, and once more
await the opening of the door. We have
learned exactly what to do. With the
opening of our cells we go forward, and
each places her broom outside the door. So
shall it be known that we each have been
visited in our cells before the locking of
our doors and gates for the night. If any
of us are taking medicine by the doctor's
orders we now receive it. On through the
ten long, weary hours of the night the
night officers patrol the wards, keeping
watch, and through a glass peep-hole si-
lently inspect us in our beds to see that
nothing is amiss.

The Cruelty of Solitary Confinement

Solitary confinement is by far the most
cruel feature of English penal servitude.
It inflicts upon the prisoner at the com-

SOLITARY CONFINEMENT CRUEL

mencement of her sentence, when most
sensitive to the horrors which prison pun-
ishment entails, the voiceless solitude, the
hopeless monotony, the long vista of to-
morrow, to-morrow, to-morrow stretching
before her, all filled with desolation and de-
spair. Once a prisoner has crossed the
threshold of a convict prison, not only is
she dead to the world, but she is expected
in word and deed to lose or forget every
vestige of her personality. Verily,

The mills of the gods grind slowly.
But they grind exceeding small.

And woe to the wight unholy
On whom those millstones fall.

So it is with the Penal Code which di-
rects this vast machinery, doing its utmost
with tireless, ceaseless revolutions to mold
body and soul slowly, remorselessly, into
the shape demanded by Act of Parliament.

CHAPTER FOUR
The Period of Probation

A Change of Cell

THE day I had completed the nine -^
raonths of solitary confinement I -en-
tered upon a new stage, that of probation
for nine months. I was taken from Hall
G to Hall A. There were in Woking sev-
en halls, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, separated by
two barred doors and a narrow passage.
Every hall has three wards. The female
warder who accompanied nle locked me in
my cell. I looked around with a sense of
intense relief. The cell was as large again
as the one I had left. The floor was of
wood instead of slate. It contained a camp
bedstead on which was placed a so-called
mattress, consisting of a sack the length of
the bed, stuffed with coir, the fiber of the

A CHANGE OF CELL

coconut. There were also provided two
coarse sheets, two blankets, and a red
counterpane. In a corner were three iron
shelves let in the wall one above the other.
On the top shelf was folded a cape, and on
top of this there was a small, coarse straw
bonnet. The second shelf contained a tin
cup, a tin plate, a wooden spoon, and a
salt-cellar. The third shelf was given up to
a slate, on which might be written com-
plaints or requests to the governor ; it is a
punishable offense in prison to write with
a pencil or on any paper not provided.

There was also a Bible, a prayer-book
and hymn-book, and a book from the libra-
ry. Near the door stood a log of wood up-
right, fastened to the floor, and this was
the only seat in the cell. It was immovable,
and so placed that the prisoner might al-
ways be in view of the warder. Near it, let
into the wall, was a piece of deal board,
which answered for a table. Through an
almost opaque piece of square glass light
gjinimered from the hall, the only means of

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

lighting the cell at night ; facing this, high
up, was a barred window admitting light
from the outside.

Evils of the Silent System

The routine of my daily life was the
same as during "solitary confinement."
The cell door may be open, but its outer
covering or gate is locked, and, although I
knew there was a human creature sepa-
rated from me only by a cell wall and an-
other gate, not a whisper might I breathe.
There is no rule of prison discipline so pro-
ductive of trouble and disaster as the " silent
system," and the tyrannous and rigorous
method with which it is enforced is the
cause of two-thirds of all the misconduct
and disturbance that occurs in prison.
The silence rule gives supreme gratifica-
tion to the tyrannous officer, for on the
slightest pretext she can report a woman
for talking — a turn of the head, a move-
ment of the lips is enough of an excuse for

EVILS OF THE SILENT SYSTEM

a report. And there is heavy punishment
that can be inflicted for this offense, both
in the male and female prisons. An offend-
er may be consigned to solitary confine-
ment, put for three days on bread and wa-
ter, or suffer the loss of a week's remission,
which means a week added to her term of
imprisonment — and all this for incautiously
uttering a word.

Unless it be specifically intended as a
means of torture, the system of solitary
confinement, even for four months, the
term to which it has since been reduced,
can meet only with condemnation. I am
convinced that, within limits, the right of
speech and the interchange of thought, at
least for two hours daily, even during pro-
bation, would insure better discipline than
perpetual silence, which can be enforced
only by a complete suppression of nature,
and must result in consequent weakness of
mind and ruin of temper. During the first
months of her sentence a prisoner is more
frequently in trouble for breach of this one

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

rule than from all other causes. The re-
duction of the term of probation from nine
to four months has been followed by a re-
duction in mental afflictions, which is proof
that nothing wholesome or good can have
its growth in unnatural solitude.

The silent system has a weakening ef-
fect upon the memory. A prisoner often
finds difficulty in deciding upon the pro-
nunciation of words which she has not
heard for a considerable period. I often
found myself, when desirous of using unu-
sual words, especially in French or Ger-
man, pronouncing them to myself in order
to fljf the pronunciation in my memory.
It is well to bear in mind what a small
number of words the prisoner has an op-
portunity of using in the monotony of pris-
on life. The same inquiries are made day
after day, and the same responses given.
A vocabulary of one hundred words will
include all that a prisoner habitually uses.

INSANITY OF PRISONERS

Insanity and Nervous Breakdown of

Prisoners

No defender of the silent system pre-
tends that it wholly succeeds in preventing
speech among prisoners. But be that as it
may, a period of four months' solitary con-
finement in the case of a female, and six
months' in the case of a male, and espe-
cially of a girl or youth, is surely a crime
against civilization and humanity. Such a
punishment is inexpressible torture to both
mind and body. I speak from experience.
The torture of continually enforced silence
is known to produce insanity or nervous
breakdown more than any other feature
connected with prison discipline. Since
the passing of the Act of 1898, mitigating
this form of punishment, much good has
been accomplished, as is proved by the
' diminution of insanity in prison life, the
decreasing scale of prison punishment, and
the lessening of the death-rate. By still
further reducing this barbarous practise,
6 81

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

or, better, by abolishing it entirely, corre-
sponding happy results may confidently be
expected. The more the prisoners are
placed under conditions and amid sur-
roundings calculated to develop a better
life, the greater is the hope that the system
will prove curative ; but so long as prison-
ers are subjected to conditions which have
a hardening effect at the very beginning of
their prison life, there is little chance of ul-
timate reformation.

Need of Separate Confinement for /
THE Weak-Minded

There are many women who hover about
the borderland of insanity for months, pos-
sibly for years. They are recognized as
weak-minded, and consequently they make
capital out of their condition, and by the
working of their distorted minds, and petty
tempers, and unreasonable jealousy, add
immeasurably not only to the ghastliness of
the " house of sorrow," but are a sad clog
on the efforts to self-betterment of their

SEPARATION FOR WEAK-MINDED

level-minded sisters in misery. Of these
many try hard to make the best of what
has to be gone through. Therefore, is it
necessary, is it wise, is it right that such a
state of things should be allowed? The
weak-minded should be kept in a separate
place, with their own officers to attend
them. Neither the weak-minded, the epi-
leptic, nor the consumptives were isolated.
There is great need of reform wherever
this is the case. Prisoners whose behavior
is different from the normal should be sep-
arated from the other prisoners, and made
to serve out their sentences under specially
adapted conditions.

I read in the newspapers that insanity is
on the increase ; this fact is clearly reflect-
ed within the prison walls. It is stated
that the insane form about three per thou-
sand of the general population. In local
English prisons insanity, it is said, even
after deducting those who come in insane,
is seven times more prevalent than among
the general population.

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

Reading an Insufficient Rei-axation

The nervous crises do not now supervene
so frequently as formerly in the case of
prisoners of a brooding disposition, but the
fact remains that, in spite of the slight
amelioration, mental light is still excluded
— that communion on which rests all hu-
man well-being. The vacuity of the soli-
tary system, to some at least, is partially
lighted by books. But what of those who
can not read, or who have not sufficient
concentration of mind to profit by reading
as a relaxation ? There are many such, in
spite of the high standard of free educa-
tion that prevails at the present day. The
shock of the trial, and the uprooting of a
woman's domestic ties, coupled with the
additional mental strain of having to start
her prison eareer in solitary confinement,
is surely neither humane, nor merciful, nor
wise. These months of solitary confine-
ment leave an ineffaceable mark. It is
during the first lonely months that the seeds

READING NO RELAXATION

of bitterness and hardness of heart are
sown, and it requires more than a passive
resistance — nay, nothing short of an unfal-
tering faith and trust in an overruling Provi-
dence — to bring a prisoner safely through
the ordeal. Let the sympathetic reader try
to realize what it means never to feel the
touch of anything soft or warm, never to
see anything that is attractive — nothing
but stone above, around, and beneath. The
deadly chill creeps into one's bones; the
bitter days of winter and the still bitterer
nights were torture, for Woking Prison was
not heated. My hands and feet were cov-
ered with chilblains.

My Sufferings from Cold and Insomnia

Oh, the horrors of insomnia! If one
could only forget one's sufferings in sleep !
During all the fifteen years of my impris-
onment, insomnia was (and, alas I is still)
my constant companion. Little wonder!
I might fall asleep, when suddenly the

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

whole prison is awakened by shriek upon
shriek, rending the stillness of the night.
I am now, perforce, fully awake. Into
my ears go tearing all the shrill exe-
crations and blasphemies, all the hideous
uproars of an inferno, compounded of
bangs, shrieks, and general demoniac ra-
gings. The wild smashing of glass startles
the halls. I lie in my darkened cell with
palpitating heart. Like a savage beast, the
woman of turmoil has torn her clothing
and bedding into shreds, and now she is
destroying all she can lay hands on. The
ward officers are rushing about in slippered
feet, the bell rings summoning the ward-
ers, who are always needed when such out-
bursts occur, and the woman, probably in a
strait-jacket, is borne to the penal cells.
Then stillness returns to the ghastly place,
and with quivering nerves I may sleep — if
I can*

MEDICAL ATTENDANCE

Medical Attendance

But what if one is ill in the night ? The
lonely prisoner in her cell may summon aid
by ringing the bell. The moment it is set
in motion it causes a black iron slab to pro-
ject from the outer wall of her cell in the
gallery. On the slab is the prisoner's num-
ber, and the ward officer, hearing the bell,
at once looks for the cell from which the
call has been sent. Presently she finds it,
then fetches the principal matron, and to-
gether they enter the hard, unhomelike
place. If the prisoner is ill they call the
doctor of the prison, and medicines and aid
will be given. But sympathy is no part
of their official duty, and be the warder
never so tender in her own domestic circle,
tenderness must not be shown toward a
prisoner. The patient may be removed
from her cell to the infirmary, where they
will care for her medically, perhaps as well
as they would in a hospital ; she may even
receive a few flowers from an infirmary

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

warder whose heart comes out from its
official shell ; but through it all, sick though
she be, she is still a prisoner under lock
and key, a woman under surveillance, a
woman denied communion with her kind.

Added Sufferings of the Delicately

Nurtured

What words can adequately describe the
long years, blank and weary enough for all
prisoners, but which are indescribably so
to one who has been delicately nurtured ! I
had enjoyed the refinements of social life ;
I had pitied, and tried, as far as lay in my
power, to help the poor and afflicted, but
I had never known anything of the bar-
barism, the sordid vices of low life. And I
was condemned to drag out existence amid
such surroundings, because twelve ignorant
men had taken upon themselves to decide
a question which neither the incompetent
judge nor the medical witnesses could
themselves determine.

SUFFERINGS OF THE DELICATE

So far as I can learn, there is no other
instance of a woman undoubtedly innocent
and of gentle birth, confined for a term of
nearly fifteen years in an English convict
prison. In the nature of things a delicate
woman feels more acutely than a robust
prisoner the rigors of prolonged captivity.

Neither confidence nor respect can be
secured when punishment is excessive, for
it then becomes an act of persecution, suit-
able only for ages of darkness. The su^
pineness of Parliament in not establishing
a court of criminal appeal fastens a dark
blot upon the judicature of England, and is
inconsistent with the innate love of justice
and fair play of its people.

How Criminals and Imbeciles are

Made

The law in prison is the same for the
rich as the poor, the " Star Class " as for
the ignorant, brutalized criminal. My reg-
ister was " L. P. 29." These letters and

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

numbers were worked in white cotton
upon a piece of black cloth. Your sen-
tence is indicated thus : " L " stands for
penal servitude for life ; " P " for the year
of conviction, which in my case was the
sixteenth year since the previous lettering.
This is done every twenty-five years. The
"29" meant that I was the twenty-ninth
convict of my year, 1889. In addition to
this register I wore a red cloth star placed
above it. The "Star Class," of which I
was a member, consisted of women who
have been convicted of one crime only,
committed in a moment of weakness or
despair, or under pressure which they were
not strong enough to resist at the time,
such as infanticide, forgery, incendiarism ;
and who, having been educated and re-
spectably brought up, betray otherwise no
criminal instincts or inclinations; and who,
when in the world, would be distinct in
character from the habitual criminal, not
only from a social point of view, but in
their virtues, faults, and crimes.

HOW CRIMINALS ARE MADE

There should be separate rules and privi-
leges to meet the case of a prisoner guilty
of moral lapses only, as distinguished from
the habitual breaker of the laiws. At pres-
ent the former gets the same treatment and
discipline as the habitual criminal of sev-
eral convictions, and can not claim a single
privilege that the old oflFender has not a
right to ask — for example, members of
both classes are limited to the same number
of letters and visits. The " Star Class " is
supposed to be kept separate from ordinary
prisoners. It was so at Woking Prison.
But at Aylesbury Prison, to which I was
transferred later, they were sandwiched be-
tween two wards of habitual criminals, with
whom they came continually in contact,
not only in passing to and from the work-
shops, fetching meals, and going to exer-
cise, but continuously. That contamina-
tion should ensue is hardly surprising. It
requires a will of iron, and nearly the spirit
of a saint, not to be corrupted by .the sights
and sounds of a prison, even when no word

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

is spoken. It is a serious accusation
against any system to say " that it produces
the thing it is designed to prevent," but
such, I am convinced, is the fact as regards
the manufacture of criminals and imbeciles
by the present system of penalism almost
the world over.

CHAPTER FIVE
The Period of Hard Labor

Routine

HAVING passed solitary confinement
and probation, I entered upon the
third stage, hard labor, when I was per-
mitted to leave my cell to assist in carrying
meals from the kitchen, and to sit at my
door and converse with the prisoners in the
adjoining cells for two hours daily — but
always in the presence of an officer who
controls and limits the conversation. My
daily routine was now also somewhat differ-
ent from that of solitary confinement and
probation.

At six o'clock the bell rings to rise.
Half an hour later a second bell signifies to
the ofiicers that it is time to come on duty.
Each warder in charge of certain wards

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

— there are three wards to each hall — then
goes to the chief matron's office, where
she receives a key wherewith to unlock the
prisoners' cells. All keys are given up by
the female warder before going oflf duty,
and locked for the night in an iron safe
under the charge of a male warder. When
again in possession of her key she repairs
to her ward, and at the order, " Unlock," she
lets out the prisoners to empty their slops.
This done, they are once more locked in,
with the exception of three women who go
down to the kitchen to fetch the cans of
tea and loaves of bread which make up
the prisoners' breakfast. At Woking the
breakfast was of cocoa and coarse meal
bread, while later, at Aylesbury, it con-
sisted of tea and white bread. I am con-
strained to remark here that more consid-
eration should be shown by the medical
officer toward women who complain of
being physically unfit to do heavy lift-
ing and carrying. The can is carried by
two women up two or three flights of

ROUTINE

stairs, according to the location of their
^ward, and the bread by one woman only.
Each can contains fourteen quarts of tea,
and the bread-basket holds thirty pounds
or more of bread. To a woman with
strong muscles it may cause no distress,
but in the case of myself and others equally
frail, the physical strain was far beyond
our strength, and left us utterly exhausted
after the task.

The breakfast was served at seven
o'clock, when the officers returned to the
mess-room to take theirs. At 7 130 a bell
rang again, and the officers returned to their
respective wards. At ten minutes to eight
the order was given, " Unlock." Once
more the doors were opened. Then fol-
lowed the order, " Chapel," and each wom-
an stood at her door with Bible, prayer-
book, and hymn-book in hand. At the
words " Pass on," they file one behind the
other into the chapel, where a warder
from each ward sits with her back to the
altar that she may be able the better to

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

Watch those under her charge and see that
they do not speak. After a service of
twenty minutes the prisoners file back to
their cells, place their books on the lower
shelf, and with a drab cape and a white
straw hat stand in readiness for the next
order, " To your doors." This given, they
descend into the hall and pass out to their
respective places of work.

Talk with the Chaplain

Many of these women have their tender,
spiritual moments. At such times they
will beg for a favorite hymn to be sung at i
the chapel service on Sunday, and their re-
quests are generally granted by the chap-
lain. He is the only friend of the prisr
oner, and his work is arduous and often
thankless. He is the only one within the
walls to whom she may turn for sympathy
and advice. It may not be every woman
who gladly avails herself of the enforced
privilege of attending daily chapel. " Re-

MY WORK m TttE ICITCHEN

ligiOh," as a terfti, is unpalatable to matiy.
But there at-e Very few who are hot better
and happiei' for the few moments' unoffi-
cial talk with her chaplain, be she Protes-
tant Of Roman Catholic.

It is to be regtetted that his authority
is so limited, and his opporttmities for
btightening the lives of thofee who Walk ih
dark places so few. Red tape and standing
orders confront him at every turn, so that
even the religious tiaining is drawn and
sucked beneath the mighty wheel of the
Penal Code, and there is no time for per-
sonal suasion to play more than a mindt
part in a convict's life.

My Work in the Kitchen

The work for first offenders, who are
called the " Star Class,*' consists of labor
in the kitchen, the mess, and the officers'
quarters^ Six months after I entered upon
the third stage I was put to Work in the
kitchen. My duties were as follows: To
7 ^7

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

wash ten cans, each holding four quarts;
to scrub one table, twenty feet in length ;
two dressers, twelve feet in length ; to wash
five hundred dinner-tins; to clean" knives;
to wash a sack of potatoes; to assist in
serving the dinners, and to scrub a piece of
floor twenty by ten feet. Besides myself
there were eight other women on hard la-
bor in the kitchen. Our day commenced
at 6 A.M., and continued until 5:30 pjh.
A half hour at breakfast time, twenty min-
utes at chapel, one hour and a half after
the midday meal, and half an hour after tea
summed up our leisure. The work was
hard and rough. The combined heat of
the coppers, the stove, and the steamers
was overpowering, especially on hot sum-
mer days ; but I struggled on, doing this
work preferably to some other, because the
kitchen was the only place where the mo-
notony of prison life was broken. It was
the " show place,** and all visitors looked in
to see the food.

THE MACHINE-MADE MENU

The Machine-made Menu

What dining in prison means may be
judged by a perusal of the schedule as
given in the Prison Commission Report:

Dost for Female Convicts

Breakfast

Three-quarters of a pint of cocoa, containing }^ ounce
of cocoa, 2 ounces milk, }i ounce of molasses.
Bread.

Dinner

Sunday. 4 ounces tinned pressed beef. Bread.

3 ounces (cooked), with its
own liquor, flavored with >^
ounce onions, and thickened
with bread and potatoes left
on previous days, % ounce
of nour, and for every 100
convicts, }i ounce of pepper.
% pound potatoes. Bread.

Saturday, i pint soup, containing 6 ounces of shins of
beef (uncooked), i ounce pearl barley, j ounces of
fresh ve^tables, including onions, and for every
100 convicts, ^ ounce pepper, ji pound potatoes.
Bread.

Thursday. % pound pudding, containing i ounce 2
dracnms water. % pound potatoes. Bread.

Monday. Mutton
Tuesday. Beef . .
Wednesday. Mutton
Friday. Beef . . .

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

Supper

I pint gruel, containinp: 2 ounces oatmeal, ^ ounce mo-
lasses, 2 ounces muk. Bread.
Bread per convict per week, 118 ounces.
Bread per copvict each week-day, 16 ounces.
Bread per convict each Sunday, 22 ounces.
Salt per convict per day, }i ounce,*

Visitors to the Kitchen

During the four years I worked in the
kitchen I saw many people. The Duke
of Connaught, Sir Evelyn Wood and his
staff, Lord Alverston, Sir Edward du
Cane, the late Lord Rothschild, and Sir
Evelyn Ruggles-Brise, besides judges, magw
istrates, authors, philanthropists and others

* A convict employed in washing, or other exceptional
hard work, may have daily an extra allowance of 3
ounces bread, and cheese i ounce, as an intermediate
meal between breakfast and dinner, and an extra allow-
ance of I ounce of meat (uncooked) four times a week.
A convict on entering the second-class will have the
choice of i pint of tea (made of j/e ounce tea, }^ ounce of
sugar, 2 ounces milk) and 2 ounces additionaJ bpead in*
stead of gruel for supper: and a convict on entering the
first or special class will nave, in addition to the aSove,
the choice of 4 ounces of baked mutton qooked in its own
liquor, not flavored or thickened, instead of boiled meat
or soup, if she takes tea instead of gruel. The food is
wholesome, but spoiled by overcooking. But oh, how
jaded the palate becomes 1

IQO

VISITORS TO THE KITCHEN

of an inquiring turn of mind, who had
obtained the necessary permit to make the
tour of the prison under the escort of the
governor or one or two of his satellites.
These ladies and gentlemen expressed the
mo3t varied and sometimes startling opin-
ions. I recollect on one occasion, when
some visitors happened to be inspecting
the kitchen during the dishing up of the
hospital patients' dinner, one old gentle-
man of the party was quite scandalized at
the sight of a juicy mutton-chop and a
tempting milk pudding. He expostulated
in such a way that the governor hastened
to explain that it was not the ordinary pris-
on diet, but was intended for a very sick
woman* Even then this old gentleman
was not satisfied, and stalked out, audibly
grumbling about people living on the fat
of the land and getting a better dinner
than he did. I firmly believe that he left
the prison under the impression that its in-
mates lived like pampered gourmets, and
that he no longer marveled there were so

lOI

MRS. MAYBRICK*S OWN STORY

many criminals when they were fed on '
such luxuries.

The "Homeuke" Cell

On another occasion a benevolent-look-
ing old lady, having given everything and
everybody as minute an inspection as
was possible, expressed herself as being
charmed, remarking:

" Everything is so nice and homelike ! "

I have often wondered what that good
lady's home was like.

A little philosophy is useful, a saving
grace, even in prison; but people have
such diflFerent ways of expressing sympa-
thy. A visitor, who I have no doubt in-
tended to be sympathetic, noticing the let-
ter " L " on my arm, inquired:

" How long a time have you to do ? "

" I have just completed ten years," was
my reply.

"Oh, well," cheerfully responded the
sympathetic one, " you have done half your

loa

THE OPIATE OF ACQUIESCENCE

time, haven't you? The remaining ten
years will soon slip by"; and the visitor
passed on, blissfully ignorant of the sword
she had unwittingly thrust into my aching
heart. Even if a prisoner has little or no
hope of a mitigation, it is not pleasant to
have an old wound ruthlessly handled, and
ten years' imprisonment as lightly spoken
of as ten days might be.

The Opiate of Acquiescence

I preferred the kitchen work, although
often beyond my strength, to any other
that fell to a prisoner's lot, because of the
glimpses into the outside world it occasion-
ally afforded. But I never permitted my-
self to dwell upon the fact that at one time
I had been the social equal of at least the
majority of those with whom I thus came
into passing contact, since to do so would
have made my position by contrast so un-
bearable that it would have unfitted me
to do the work in a spirit of submission,

103

MJIS. MAYPRICK'S QWN STORY

not to spef^k of the mental suffering which
^W^kened n^en^ories would h^ve occasioned.
I soon found that both my spiritual and my
mental salvation, under the repressive rules
in force, depended upon unresisting acqui-
escence — the keeping of my sensibilities
dulled as near as possible to the level of the
mere anijnal state which the Penal Code,
whether intentionally or otherwise, inevita-
bly brings about.

I have been frequently asked by friends,
since my release, how I could possibly have
endured the shut-in life vender ^uch soul-
depressing influences. I have given here
and there in my narrative indicationp pf
iny feelings under different circumstances.

Here I may state in general that I early
found that thoughts of without and thoughts
of within— those that haunted me of the
world and those that were ever present in
my surroundings— would not march to-
gether. I had to keep step with either the
one or the other. The conflict between the
two soon became unbearaWe, an4 I w?^s

104

Tpp OPIATE OF acquiescb;ncp

compelled to make choice : whether I would
live in the past a-nd as much a3 possible ex-
clude the prison, and take the punishment
which ^yould inevitably foUow^aP it had
in so many cases — in an unbalanced mind ;
or wpuld ^hut the past out altogether and
coerce my thoughts within the limitations
of the prison regulations. My safety lay,
as I found, in compressing my thoughts to
the smallest compass of mental existence,

and no sooner did worldly visions or

memories intrude themselves, as they nec^
essarily would, than I immediately and res^
olutely shut them out as one draws the
blind to exclude the light. While I thus
suppressed all emotions belonging tp a nat-
ural life, I nevertheless found, whenever I
came accidentally in contact with visitors
from the outside world, that my inner nar
ture was attuned like the strings of a harp
to the least vibration of others' emotionSf
The slightest unconscious inflection of the
voice, whether sympathetic or otherwise,
would e&ll forth either a grateful response

IPS

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

or an instant withdrawal into the armor of
reserve which I had to adopt for my self-
protection. But this exclusion of the world
created a dark background which served
only to intensify the light that shone upon
me from realms unseen of mortal eyes.
Lonely I was, yet I was never alone. But,
however satisfying the spiritual commun-
ion, the human heart is so constituted that
it needs must yearn for love and sympathy
from its own kind, for recognition of all
that is best in us, by something that is like
unto it, in its experiences, feelings, emo-
tions, and aspirations.

Visrrs OF Prisoners' Friends

A prisoner is allowed to receive a visit
from her friends at intervals of six^ four,
and two months, according to her stage of
service. There are four stages, each of
nine months' duration: first, solitary con-
finement; second, probation; while the
third and fourth stages are not specially

io6

VISITS OF PRISONERS* FRIENDS

designated. During the first two stages
the prisoner is clothed in brown, at the
third stage in green, and the fourth in
navy blue. Every article worn by the pris-
oner or in use by her is stamped with a
" broad arrow," the convict's crest.

A visit may be forfeited by bad conduct
or delayed through a loss of marks. When
a prisoner is entitled to receive a visitor,
she applies to the governor for permission
to have the permit sent to the person she
names ; but if the police report concerning
the designated visitor is unfavorable the
request is not granted. When a prisoner's
friends— three being the maximum— arrive
at the prison gates they ring a bell. The
gatekeeper views them through a grille and
inquires their business. They show their
permit; whereupon he notifies the chief
matron, who in turn notifies the officer in
charge of the prisoner.

The rule regarding visits precluded any
discussion of prison affairs, or anything
regarding treatment, or aught that passes

107

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

within the prison wallsi Had I permitted
myself to break this rule the visit would
have been stopped at once by the mktrdn
iii charge. Consequently, all thi6 state-
ments on such matters reported from time
to time in the press durihg my impriscft5h
metit, and quoted as t'eceived from my
mother or frieilds, are shown to be pure
fabrications.

My Mother's Visits

A visit ! What joy or what sorrow those
words express in the outside world I But
in prison— the pain of it is so great that it
can hardly be borne*

Whehever my mother's visit was an-
nounced, accompanied by a matron I
passed into a stnallj oblong rooitt. There
a grilled screen confronted me ; a yard or
two beyond was & second barrier identi-
cal in structure, and behind it I could
see the form of my mother, and sitting
in the space between the grilles, thus addi-
tionally separating us, was a prison ma-

io8

jj MY MOTHER'S VISITS

'tron. No kiss; not even a clasp of the
Jiand; no privacy sacred to mother and
^daughter; not a whisper could pass be-

if?

^tween UB. Was not this the very depth of

.humiliation?

^ My mother crossed every two months
from France to visit me. Neither heat nor

' cold deterred her from taking this fatiguing

' journey. Thus again and again she trav
eled a hundred miles for love of me, to
cheer, comfort, and console; a hundred
miles for thirty minutes I

At these visits she would tell me as best
she could of the noble, unwearied efforts
of my countrymen and countrywomen in
my cause ; of the sympathy and support of
my own Government ; of the earnest efforts
of the different American ambassadors in
my behalf. And though their efforts
proved all in vain, the knowledge of their
belief in my innocence, and of their sympa-
thy comforted, cheered, and strengthened
me to tread bravely the thorny path of my
daily life,

109

^ I

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

Almost before we had time to compose
ourselves there would come a silent sign
from the mute matron in the chair — ^the
thirty minutes had passed. " Good-by," we
say, with a lingering look, and then turn our
backs upon each other, she to go one way,
I another ; one leading out into the broad,
open day, the other into the stony gloom
of the prison. Do you wonder that when
I went back into my lonely cell the day
had become darker? I went forth to meet
a crown of joy and love, only to return
with a cross of sorrow; for these visits
always created passionate longings for
freedom, with their vivid recollections of
past joys that at times were almost unbear-
able. No one will ever know what my
mother su£fered.

A Letter from Lord Russell

As the years passed the repression of
the prison system developed a kind of
mental numbness which rendered my life,

A LETTER FROM LORD RUSSELL

in a measure, more endurable. It also
came as a relief to my own sufferings to
take an interest in those of my fellow pris-
oners. Then Lord Russell of Killowen
wrote me a letter* expressing his continued
confidence in me, which greatly renewed
my courage, while the loving messages from
my friends in America kept alive my faith
in human nature.

Punished for Another's Fault

By the exercise of great self-control and
restraint I had maintained a perfect good-
conduct record at Woking for a period of
years, when an act of one of my fellow pris-
oners got me into grievous trouble.

It is the rule to search daily both the cell
and the person of all prisoners — those at
hard labor three times a day — to make
sure that they have nothing concealed with
which they may do themselves bodily in-
jury.

* Reproduced in the Introduction to Part Twa

III

Mrs. MAVfeRldK'S oWff STOkV

to me it i^is a bittef Itidigliity. I li^ras
never allowed to forge!t that, beiilg a pris-
oner, even my body was not my own. It
was hot" rlble to be touched by Uhfrieiidly
hands, yet I Was compelled to submit
— to be Undt-essed and be seafChed. Dur-
ing the term of my imprisonment I wa^
searched about ten thousand times, and oil
only one occasion was anjrthing found con-
trary to regulations. I had no knowledge
of it at the time, as the article had been
placed surreptitiously in my cell by another
prisoner to save herself from puftishrtieiit.

The facts are as follows: 1 was Working
in the kitchen, when a prisoner upset some
boiling water on my foot. I thought it
best not to speak of it, and did hot, there-
fore, mention it to any one. My foot, how-
ever, became inflamed and caused me great
pain, and the prisoner in question, noticing
that t limped, inquired what the matter
was. I told her that the coarse wool of my
stocking was irritating the blister on my

foot. Thereupoh ihe offered td give me

PUNISHED FOR ANOTHER'S FAULT

some wool of a finer quality with which to
knit a more comfortable pair. I was not
aware at the time that this was not permit-
ted, nor that the wool was stolen. When
it neared her turn to be searched, having
a lot of this worsted concealed in her bed,
she made the excuse of indisposition in
order to return to her cell and get rid of it.
While there she transferred it from her
cell to mine, its neighbor, the doors of the
cells being open during working-time.

When the time came to search my cell,
the wool was, of course, found, and I was
at once reported. The warder took me to
the penal ward, and I was shut in a cell, in
which the light came but dimly through a
perforated sheet of iron. This was at eight
A.M. At ten o'clock I was brought before
the governor for examination and judg-
ment. I stated that the wool did not be-
long to me and that I was ignorant as to
how it got into my cell. The governor
took the officer's deposition to the effect
that it was found in my cell, and reasoned
3 113

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

that I must, therefore, have knowledge of
the article. I was taken back to the pun-
ishment cell and left there for eight hours.
When the officer opened the door to read
to me the governor's judgment, I was
found in a dead faint on the floor. With
some difficulty I was restored to conscious-
ness and was then removed to the hospital.
When I had sufficiently recovered from
the shock, I was allowed to return to my
own cell in the hall to do my punishment.
I was degraded for a month to a lower
stage, with a loss of twenty-six marks, and
had six days added to my original sentence.
Had this offense occurred under the
more enlightened system that obtains at
Aylesbury Prison at the present time, I
should have been forgiven, as it was a first
o£fense under this particular rule. The
governor at Woking was a just and hu-
mane man, and he was not a little troubled
to reconcile the fact of my being in posses-
sion of this worsted, when I had no means
of access to the tailor shop or of coming in

114

PUNISHED FOR ANOTHER'S FAULT

contact with any of the workers there who
alone had the handling of it. Of course, I
could not explain that the worsted had
been passed into the kitchen by one of the
tailoresses, who came every morning to
fetch hot water for use in the tailor-room,
and who was a friend of the prisoner who
put it in my cell.

I was kept in the hall during the months
of my penal punishment, and also for
twelve months thereafter, since at that
time a "report" always carried with it a
loss of the privilege of working in the
kitchen. When I had an opportunity, in
" association time," of speaking to the pris-
oner who had got me into this trouble, and
reproached her for the injury she had done
me, she frankly confessed her deed, but ex-
cused herself by saying that she did not
expect I would be punished ; that she was
tempted to do it because at that time her
case was under consideration at the Home
Office, and that she had received the prom-
ise of an early discharge if she did not have

115

. I

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

any " reports." She well knew that if this
worsted had been found in her cell this
promise would have been revoked. As she
was a "life woman," and had served a long
time, I had not the heart to deprive her of
this, perhaps her only chance of freedom,
through a vindication of myself. A week
later I had the satisfaction of knowing that
my silence had been the means of her lib-
eration.

Forms of Punishment

The punishment of prisoners at Woking
consisted of :

1. Loss of marks, termed in prison par-
lance, "remission on her sentence," but
without confinement in the penal ward.

2. Solitary confinement for twenty-four
hours in the penal ward, with loss of marks.

3. Solitary confinement, with loss of
marks, on bread and water from one to
three days.

4. Solitary confinement, with loss of
marks, on bread and water for three days,

116

THE TRUE AIM OF PUNISHMENT

either in a strait-jacket or "hobbles."
Hobbling consists in binding the wrists
and ankles of a prisoner, then strapping
them together behind her back. This
position causes great suffering, is bar-
barous, and can be enforced only by the
doctor's orders.

5. To the above was sometimes added,
in violent cases, shearing and blistering of
the head, or confinement in the dark cell.
The dark cell was underground, and' con-
sisted of four walls, a ceiling, and a floor,
with double doors, in which not a ray of
light penetrated. No. 5 punishment was
abolished at Aylesbury, but in that prison
even to give a piece of bread to a fellow
prisoner is still a punishable offense.

The True Aim of Punishment

Punishment should be carried out in a
humane, sympathetic spirit, and not in a
dehumanizing or tyrannous manner. It

should be remedial in character, and not

117

A I

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

degrading and deteriorating. It should be
the aim and object of the prison system
to send a prisoner back into the world ca-
pable of rehabilitating himself or herseH
and becoming a useful citizen. The pun-
ishment in a convict prison, within my
knowledge, is carried out in an oppressive
way, the delinquent is left entirely to her-
self to work out her own salvation, and in
nine cases out of ten she works out her
own destruction instead, and leaves prison
hardened, rancorous, and demoralized.

The Evil of Collective Punishment

There are so many prisoners with whom
complaint-making is a mania, who on
every possible occasion make trivial, exag-
gerated, and false complaints, that it is not
altogether strange that officials look with
a certain skepticism on all fault-finding;
hence it frequently happens that those
with just grievances are discredited be-
cause of the shortcomings of the habitiial

xi8

EVIL OF COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT

grumblers. At the same time, one can
not disapprove too strongly of collective
punishment which involves the utter ab-
sence of trust in any prisoner, however
deserving. A prisoner slightly abuses a
privilege or is guilty of some small in-
fringement of the rules, when down comes
the hammer wielded by the inexorable
Penal Code, and strikes not only the one
offending, but, in its expansive dealing, all
the other prisoners, guilty or innocent of
the offense. Many a privilege, trivial in
itself and absolutely harmless, has been
condemned because of its abuse by one
prisoner.

I cite one instance. Each cell was pro-
vided with a nail on which, during the day,
the prisoner could hang a wet towel, and,
during the night, her clothes. Those who
worked in the laundry came in with wet
clothing every evening, which, as no change
is allowed, must be either dried at night or
put on wet the next morning. One pris.
oner pulled her nail out and purposely

119

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

wounded herself. She was weak-minded,
and no doubt thought to excite pity. The
matter was referred to the director, Mr.
Pennythorne, who gave the order that all
the nails throughout the building be re-
moved. Hence, because of the shortcom-
ings of one weak-minded woman, all oppor-
tunity for the working women to dry their
clothes was taken from them. Others be-
sides myself appealed to the director and
protested. He replied that we would be
obliged to submit to the edict the same as
the rest, and that no distinction could be
made in our favor. Of course we could
not argue the matter; the penalty fell
heavier upon the laundry women and the
kitchen workers than upon myself. It is
a glaring instance of the great wrong done
by collective punishment. However, the
prisoners had their revenge, for they never
referred to him afterward except as " Mr.
Pennynails."

120

EVIL OF CONSTANT SUPERVISION

The Evil of Constant Supervision

Individual supervision is compulsory,
and in many cases it is essential, but not
in all. Surely there are some prisoners
Avho might, with good results, be trusted.
The supervision is never relaxed ; the pris-
oner is always in sight or hearing of an
officer. During the day she is never trust-
ed out of sight, and at night the watchful
eye of the night officer can see her by
means of a small glass fitted in the door of
each cell. She may grow gray during the
length of her imprisonment, but the rule
of supervision is never relaxed, Try and
realize what it means always to feel that
you are watched. After all, these prison-
ers are women, some may be mothers, and
it is surely the height of wickedness and
folly to crush whatever remnant of human-
ity and self-respect even a convict woman
may still have left her. These poor crea-
tures who wear the brand of prison shame
are guarded and controlled by women, but

121

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

men make the rules which regulate every
movement of their forlorn lives.

Some Good Points of Convict Prisons

The rules of prison, rigorous as they
are, are not wholly without some consider-
ation for the hapless beings who are con-
demned to suflFer punishment for their sins
within their gloomy walls. On the men's
side the system is harsher, the life harder,
and the discipline more strict and severe ;
and I can well believe that for a man of
refinement and culture the punishment
falls little short of a foretaste of inferno.
But gloomy and tragic as the convict es-
tablishment is, it is a better place than the
county prison, and I have heard habitual
criminals avow that a convict prison is the
nearest approach to a comfortable " home "
in the penal world. I know that a certain
type of degenerate women, after serving
their sentences, have committed grave
offenses with the sole object of obtaining a

122

MY SICKNESS

conviction which would send them back to
penal servitude. For such the segregation
system would be the most e£Eectual rem-
edy.

My Sickness.

I had never been a robust woman, and
the hardships of prison life were breaking
down my constitution. The cells at Wo-
king were not heated. In the halls were
two fireplaces and a stove, which were
alight day and night; but as the solid
doors of the cells were all locked, the heat
could not penetrate them. Thus, while
the atmosphere outside the cell might be
warm, the inside was icy cold. During
the hard winter frosts the water frequently
froze in my cell over night. The bed-
clothing was insufficient, and I suffered as
much from the cold as the poorest and
most miserable creature on earth. Added
to this, I was compelled to go out and ex-
ercise in all kinds of weather. On rainy
days I would come in with my shoes and

123

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

stockings wet through, and as I possessed
only one pair of shoes and one pair of
stockings, I had to keep them on, wet as
they were. The shoes I had to wear until
worn out; the stockings until changed on
the Saturday of each week, which was the
only day a change of any kind of under-
wear could be obtained, no matter in what
condition it might be. Therefore, the ma-
jority of the inmates in the winter time
seldom had dry feet, if there was much
rain or snow, the natural result being ca-
tarrh, influenza, bronchitis, and rheuma-
tism, from all of which I suffered in turn.

Taken to the Infirmary

As long as the prisoner is not feverish
she is treated in her own cell in the ward,
her food remaining the ordinary prison
dietary; but as soon as her temperature
rises, as occurred in my case frequently,
she is admitted as a patient to the infirm-
ary, where she is fed according to medical
prescription.

124

DESOLATION OF A SICK PRISONER

The infirmary stands a little detached
from the prison grounds. It has several
wards, containing from six to fifteen beds,
and several cells for cases that require iso-
lation. The beds are placed on each side
of the room, and are covered with blue
and white counterpanes. At the head of
each is a shelf, on which stand two cups,
a plate, and a diet card. In the middle
of each room is a long deal table. On the
walls are a few old Scriptural pictures.

The Utter Desolation of a Sick

Prisoner

When a prisoner is admitted she is first
weighed and then allotted a bed. Her
food and medicine are given her by an
officer, who places it on a chair at her bed-
side if she is too ill to sit at the table.
The doctor makes his rounds in the morn-
ing and evening, and if the patient is
seriously ill he may make a visit in the
night also. The matron in charge goes

I2S

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

through the wards at stated times to see
that all is going well, but there is no
nureing. The prisoner must attend to her
own wants, and if too weak to do so, she
must depend upon some other patient less
ill than herself to assist her. To be sick
in prison is a terrible experience. I felt
acutely the contrast between former ill-
nesses at home and the desolation and the
indifference of the treatment under condi-
tions afforded by a prison infirmary. To
lie all day and night, perhaps day after day,
and week after week, alone and in silence,
without the touch of a friendly hand, the
sound of a friendly voice, or a single ex-
pression of sympathy or interest! The
misery and desolation of it all can not be
described. It must be experienced. I ar-
rived at Woking ill, and I left Woking ill.

126

CHAPTER SIX
At Aylesbury Prison

Removal from Woking

I HAD been admitted to the infirmary
suflFering from a feverish cold. I had
been in bed a fortnight and was feeling
very weak, when, on the morning of No-
vember 4, 1896, I awoke to find the ma-
tron standing at my bedside. " Maybrick,"
she said, " the governor has given orders
that you are to be removed to-day to
Aylesbury Prison. Get up at once."
Without a word of explanation she left. I
had become a living rule of obedience, and
so with trembling hands dressed myself.
Presently I heard footsteps approaching.
A female warder entered with a long, dark
cloak covered with broad arrows, the insig-
nia of the convict. I was told to put on
this garment of shame. Then, supported

127

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

by the warder, I crossed the big yard to the
chief matron's office. There other women
of the "Star Class" were waiting, hand-
cuffed. A male warder stepped forward
and told me to hold out my hands, where-
upon he fastened on a pair of handcuffs and
chained me to the rest of the gang. This
was done by means of a chain which ran
through an outer ring attached to each
pair of handcufifs, thus uniting ten women
in a literal chain-gang. This was to me
the last straw of degradation — the parting
indignity of hateful Woking; but, happily,
this was a painful prelude to a more merci-
ful regime at Aylesbury.

Some of the women were weeping, some
swearing. When all were ready the pris-
on-van drove into the yard and we filed out
to the clanking of our chains. Then the
door was shut and we were driven off. A
special train was waiting at the station, and
escorted between male warders we got in.
It was bitterly cold and raining heavily,
but crowds lined the road and platforms.

128

6El

J ,^1

T H, t

■; Tm:."- '

NEW INSIGNIA OF SHAME

New Insignia of Shame

We were objects of morbid curiosity to
the idle and curious people, who may or
may not have felt sorry for us. But to be
stared at was most distressing to all, to the
first offender in particular. If the public
but realized how prisoners suffer when
their disgrace is thus brought to the public
notice, they might feel ashamed of their
lack of ordinary human consideration and
pass on. But why should it be necessary at
all to subject a prisoner to such humiliation
and degradation ? Male as well as female
prisoners could be transferred from one
prison to another without attracting any
notice in the street or at the station, if they
were provided with garments for traveling
upon which the hideous brand of shame —
the "broad arrow'* — is not stamped. It is
this mark of condemnation which attracts
the morbid curiosity of the people. Such
exhibitions and the callous disregard of a
9 129

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

prisoner's feelings can only harden and
embitter the heart and lower his or her self-
r^iiiect.

Arrival at Aylesbury Prison

After a journey of nearly five hours we
arrived at Aylesbury Station. The public
were apparently aware that the first batch
of convicts was to be transferred that day,
as there were crowds at all the stations at
which we stopped. When we got out at
Aylesbury it was with difficulty that a pas-
sage was made for us. The prison-vans
were in readiness, and we were rapidly
driven away. I felt weak and faint and
cold. A thick fog enveloped the town,
and I could see only the dim outlines of
houses appearing and disappearing as we
passed along. We stopped before what
appeared a gigantic structure, and then
drove through two large iron gates into a
small courtyard. There we descended
and drew up in line to be counted by the

130

ARRIVAL AT AYLESBURY PRISON

officer, while our numbers and names were
gfiven to the governor, who stood waiting
to receive us. The order " Pass on ! " was
called by the matron in charge, whereupon
we entered a long, dark, gloomy passage,
at the end of which was a strong, barred
door. This was unlocked, and, when we
had passed in, relocked.

I have already described what a prison
is like. Again we stood in line. Then a
male warder came forward. He unlocked
my handcufiFs and unclasped the chain
which bound me to my fellow convicts.
With a clang that echoed through the
empty halls they fell together to the
ground. My wrists were bruised and sore
from the long pressure of their combined
weight.

Presently the order " Pass on ! " was re-
peated, and, led by a female warder, we
went up two flights of the iron stairway to
the top ward of the hall. Each prisoner
was then in turn locked into a cell. Thus
ended my second journey as a prisoner.

131

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

The contrast with former journeys in my
life drew bitter tears from my eyes.

During the remainder of the week daily
batches of prisoners continued to arrive,
and on the sixth day all had been duly
transferred from Woking Prison, which
was then turned into military barracks.

After this short break in our prison life
the same daily routine was once more ta-
ken up. Whether it was due to the change
of air or other physical causes I can not
say, but from the time of my arrival I be-
gan to droop. I lost strength and suflFered
terribly from insomnia.

A New Prison RiSgime

Six months after our arrival, there came
a change of authorities, and with the pass-
ing of the years a more enlightened r^
gime was instituted by the Home Office.
If a prisoner has any complaint to make
or wishes to seek advice, she asks to have
her name put down to see the governor.

132

A NEW PRISON REGIME

She is then termed a "wisher," and is
*' seen " by him in his office in the presence
of the chief matron. Her request is written
down by him in her penal record, and if he
can not settle the matter out of hand it is
referred to a " visiting director," to whom
the prisoner is permitted to make a state-
ment. If this gentleman finds that his
powders are insufficient to deal with the
question, he in turn passes it on to the
prison commission, and sometimes it goes
even to the Secretary of State himself.

The same privilege holds good concern-
ing medical matters. If a prisoner is feel-
ing ill she asks the officer in charge of the
ward where she is located to enter her
name on the doctor's book. At ten o'clock
the prisoner is sent for, and sees the doctor
in the presence of an infirmary nurse. He
enters her name in a book, also the pre-
scription, both of which are copied later
in the prisoner's medical record. If a
prisoner is dissatisfied with the treatment
she is receiving, she can make application

133

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

to see the " medical inspector," who comes
to the prison every three months. But if
neither the governor, nor the doctor, nor
the director, nor the inspector gives satisr
faction, then there is the " Board of Visit-
ors " to inquire into the complaint.

The Board of Visitors

The idea of the " Board of Visitors " is
to act as a guaranty to the public that
everything is honest and above board, and
that there can be no possibility of inhuman
treatment. If this is the sole object in
view — namely, that the prisoners shall be
seen by these " visitors " — then the object
is largely attained. They have done much
to ameliorate the prisoners' condition.
Whereas, at one time the women slept in
their clothes, they are now provided with
nightdresses; instead of sitting with their r
feet always on the stone floor, they are
now allowed a small mat, as well as a
wooden stool ; and, as the result of many

134

THE BOARD OF VISITORS

complaints regarding the rapid decay of
teeth, toothbrushes are allowed, a conces-
sion which I much appreciated. For a
short time felt slippers were granted us,
but these have been discontinued on the
ground of expense. The same beneficent
influence also secured wide-brimmed hats
for the women. Formerly they had noth-
ing to protect their eyes, and the reflected
glare from the stone walls was the cause of
much weakness and inflammation.

There were several changes in the diet
also. Tea was substituted for cocoa at
breakfast and supper, white bread in lieu
of wholemeal bread, and tinned meat re-
placed the dry bread and cheese previously
given on Sunday.

The time of solitary confinement was re-
duced from nine months to four, and im-
mediately on its expiration the probation-
ers can now work in "association" in
either the laundry or the tailor's shops
where the officers' uniforms— of brown
cashmere in summer and navy-blue serge

135

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

in winter— are made, besides all the cloth-
ing for the prisoners' own use ; also in the
twine-room, where excellent spinning- is
done ; while the prisoner with special apti-
tude may be recommended to the bead-
room, which turns out really artistic work.

Regulations Concerning Letters and

Visits

The prisoners were also allowed to re-
ceive three photographs of near relatives
and to keep them in their cells. Previ-
ously these had to be returned within
twenty-four hours. Best of all, the inter-
vals between letters and visits were re-
duced by a month. The number of letters
permitted to be sent by a prisoner varies
according to the stage she is in. In the
fourth stage a letter is allowed every two
months, and a "special letter" occasion-
ally, if the prisoner's conduct has been sat-
isfactory.

The following is a copy of the prison

136

CONCERNING LETTERS AND VISITS

regulations concerning communications
betAveen prisoners and their friends :

** The following regulations as to commu-
nications, by visit or letter, between pris-
; oners and their friends, are notified for the
information of their correspondents:

" The permission to write and receive let-
ters is given to prisoners for the purpose
: of enabling them to keep up a connec-
tion with their respectable friends, and not
that they may be kept informed of public
events.

" All letters are read by the prison author-
h ities. They must be legibly written, and
: not crossed. Any which are of an objec-
j. tionable tendency, either to or from pris-
, oners, or containing slang or improper ex-
l pressions, will be suppressed.

" Prisoners are permitted to receive and
' to write a letter at intervals, which depends
on the rules of the stage they attain by in-
i' dustry and good conduct; but matters of
l^i special importance to a prisoner may be
li communicated at any time by letter (pre-
paid) to the governor, who will inform the
^ prisoner thereof, if expedient.

137

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

"In case of misconduct the privilege of
receiving and writing a letter may be for-
feited for a time.

" Money, books, postage-stamps, food, to-
bacco, clothes, etc., should not be sent to
prisoners for their use in prison, as noth-
ing is allowed to be received at the prison
for that purpose.

" Persons attempting to clandestinely
communicate with, or to introduce any ar-
ticle to or for prisoners, are liable to fine
or imprisonment, and any prisoner con-
cerned in such practises is liable to be se-
verely punished.

" Prisoners' friends are sometimes applied
to by unauthorized persons to send money,
etc., to them privately, under pretense that
they can apply it for the benefit of the pris-
oners, and under such fraudulent pretense
such persons endeavor to obtain money for
themselves. Any letter containing such
an application received by the friends of a
prisoner should be at once forwarded by
them to the governor.

"Prisoners are allowed to receive visits
from their friends, according to rules, at
intervals which depend on their stage.

138

CONCERNING LETTERS AND VISITS

" When visits are due to prisoners notifi-
cation will be sent to the friends whom
they desire to visit them."

While in Woking Prison, under the priv-
ilege of these rules, I wrote the following let-
ter to the late Miss Mary A. Dodge (" Gail
Hamilton") — she who was my most elo-
quent and steadfast champion in America :

P 29, June 24, 1892.
Dear Miss Dodge:

I feel that I owe you such a debt of grat-
itude for the truly noble, beautiful, and
womanly manner in which you have used
that glorious gift of God — your genius— in
the cause of a helpless and sorely afflicted
sister, whose claim to your compassion was
but that of a common humanity and na-
tionality, that I feel I must send you a few
lines, if only to disabuse your mind of
any lingering doubts of my gratitude that
my silence may have caused to arise. My
dear mother has, I believe, explained to
you the almost insurmountable difficulty I
find in writing to friends abroad, with only

139

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

one letter every two months at my dispo-
sal, and which I do not feel justified in de-
priving her of. I can, therefore, only ex-
press through her from time to time my
heartfelt thanks for all that has been and is
still being done in my behalf. I utterly
despair, however, of finding words that
shall convey to you even the faintest idea
of the fulness of a heart completely over-
whelmed by the sympathy, kindness, and
generosity of my friends. My feelings of
love, however, and admiration for you and
them is simply beyond all power of expres-
sion.

The world may and does bemoan the
gradual extinction in this generation of
those finer and nobler traits of character
which our forefathers so beautifully exem-
plified ; lays at the door of a higher civili-
zation the terrible increase of selfishness,
pride, and indifference to all the higher du-
ties of Christianity. But, I ask, where can
a grander exception be found to such ap-
parent degeneration than that displayed by
the conduct of those truly noble men and
women, who, without a thought of self or

of the trouble involved, have stood forth to

140

CONCERNING LETTERS AND VISITS

plead the cause of their countrywoman?
Could man do more than he is doing?
Could woman do more for her nearest and
dearest than the ladies of America are do-
ing for me ? No ! a thousand times, no I

Some day, my health and purse permit-
ting, I shall hope to tell them face to face,
if mere words can tell, how greatly their
faithful, unwearying e£Forts, their undaunt-
ed energy, their sympathy and kindness
and generosity have helped me to rise
above the depressing influences of the in-
justice I am suffering under, to endure pa-
tiently, to bear bravely the hardships of this
life, and to feel through all that the hope
and comfort afforded me by their help is
but a beautiful example of the way in
which God answers the prayers of his peo-
ple.

I would now fain beg of you, dear friend,
to express my deepest and most heartfelt
gratitude to President Harrison, Mr. Blaine,
and the other members of the Cabinet.
Also to all the distinguished gentlemen
who so generously attached their signatures
to the splendid petition sent lately from
Washington to the Hon. Henry Matthews,

141

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

Secretary of State, London, and to assure
them of my great appreciation of the honor
and justice they have done me in thus es-
pousing my cause. Oh, how wretchedly I
have expressed what I really feel and would
like to say ! But you, too, have a woman's
heart, and you can therefore realize the
feelings I find it so hard to express. It
would be a still more hopeless task to try
to tell you what I think of you — noblest
and truest of women ; that must wait until
we meet. Until that glad day, believe me.
Yours gratefully and sincerely,

Florence E. Maybrick.

P.S. My next date for receiving letters
is 19th July.

To Miss Dodge,

Washington, D. C, U. S. A.

A Visit from Lord Russell

I was sitting in my cell one day feeling
very weak and ill. I was recovering from
an attack of influenza, and the cold comfort

142

A VISIT FROM LORD RUSSELL

of my surroundings increased the physical
and mental depression which accompanies
this complaint. I wondered vaguely why
my life was spared, why I was permitted to
suffer this terrible injustice, when my sad
thoughts were distracted by the sounds of
approaching voices. I arose from my seat
— which is a compulsory attitude of sub-
mission when an authority approaches a
prisoner— and stood' waiting for I knew
not what. Presently I heard the tones of
a voice which I can never forget while
memory lasts, though that voice is now
hushed in death; a voice which, through
the darkest days of my life, ever spoke
words of trust, comfort, and encourage-
ment. Surely I must be dreaming, I
thought, or my mind is growing weak and I
am becoming fanciful ; for how should this
voice reach me within these prison walls ?
I looked up, startled, and once more
thought my mind was wandering, for there
stood the noblest, truest friend that woman
ever had : the champion of the weak and

143

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

the oppressed ; the brave upholder of jus-
tice and law in the face of prejudice and
public hostility — Lord Russell of Killow-
en, Lord Chief Justice of England. He
stepped into my cell with a kindly smile
on his face, and sat down on my stool,
while the governor waited outside. He
talked to me for half an hour, and I can
never forget the beauty and grandeur of
that presence. As he rose to leave he
turned toward me, and, seeing unshed
tears in my eyes, he took my hand in his,
and in his strong, emphatic way said : " Be
brave, be strong; I believe you to be an
innocent woman. I have done and will
continue to do all I can for you."

It has been denied in England that Lord
Russell took any interest in me other than
he might in any client he was paid to de-
fend ; but the letter which I have already
given, written to me at Woking, as well
as various statements made by him, and
quoted elsewhere, must set that aspersion

at rest.

144

^■' THE

CHAPTER SEVEN
A Petition for Release

Denied by the Secretary of State

1HAD been at Aylesbury about eight
months when I petitioned the Secre-
tary of State for a reconsideration of my
case, with a view to my release. To this I
received the usual official reply, " Not suffi-
cient grounds."

A prisoner may petition the Secretary of
State every three months. In my opinion,
the privilege of petitioning on a case
should be reduced from four times a year
to once a year, with the provision that if
anything of importance to a prisoner tran-
spires within that period it may be duly
submitted to the Secretary of State on rec-
ommendation of the governor or director ;
lo 145

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

that all complaints regarding^ focxi, treat-
ment, or medical attention should be re-
ferred to the visiting director in the first
instance, instead of the Secretary of State,
who under the present system passes it
back to the directors for the necessary in-
vestigation. This would do away with the
continual daily distress and irritation and
disappointment created in the prison on
receipt of unfavorable replies from the
Home Office. A prisoner petitions. A
private inquiry is held, to which the pris-
oner is not a party, and of which she has no
information, nor does she receive any du-
ring its progress or after its conclusion,
save that the result, which is nearly always
negative, is communicated to her. In this
inquiry any one who is opposed to the
prisoner may seek to influence the offi-
cial mind. I will state a case in point. A
friend asked the Secretary of State for
the United States, the Hon. John Hay,
to interest himself in my case. Mr. Hay
replied that he had been informed by the

146

REPORT OF MISCONDUCT REFUTED

Home Office that I had been " a disobedi-
ent and troublesome prisoner."

Report of My Misconduct Refuted

When I was told this at a visit I had my
name entered to see the governor. I in-
sisted that the governor should inform me
when, and after what breach of the rules,
such a report had been sent to the Home
Office. After carefully looking through
my penal record he could find no entry to
that effect, and concluded by saying that
I must have been misinformed. He said
that my conduct was good, and that he had
never made any report to the contrary.
Obviously, therefore, this report from the
Home Office to Mr. Hay was due to an ad-
verse influence, of which I have still no
knowledge. Statements are made against
a prisoner, of the nature of which she is en-
tirely ignorant. Being ignorant, she has
no way of refuting them. Worse still, they
are retained in the Home Office to her dy-

147

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

ing day, and the unfortunate woman knows
nothing of them or their eflFect. The only
thing certain is that she is further con-
demned.

Need of a Court of Criminal Appeal

The Home Office, while exercising a pri-
vate function of reconsideration ground-
ed on the royal prerogative of mercy, em-
phatically disclaims being a court of appeal
or a judicial tribunal in any sense of the
word. Yet the consideration of a convict's
case rests alone with the Secretary of
State. It is a matter of unwritten law that
the Home Secretary shall act individually
and solely upon his own responsibility, and
none of his colleagues are to assume or
take part therein.

There are numerous instances where
judges, witnesses, and juries have gone
wrong. Indeed, it will be found that even
in cases which have seemed the clearest
and least complicated in the trial grievous

148

A COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

mistakes have been made. But in Eng-
land the blame rests on the public and the
bar in that no means are provided to set
the wrong right. What a difference it
would have made in my life if I had been
g^ranted a second trial ! I could have called
other witnesses, submitted fresh evidence,
and refuted false testimony. Is it not the
climax of injustice that men and women, if
sued for money, even for a few shillings,
can appeal from court to court — even to
the House of Lords, the English court of
last resort ; but when character, all that life
holds dear, and life itself, are in jeopardy,
a prisoner's fate may depend upon the in-
competent construction of one man, and
there is no appeal ?

A hard-worked Secretary of State, whose
time, night and day, is crowded with every
kind of duty, correspondence, and labor, in
the House of Commons or in the Home
Office, has to consider a vast number of
petitions, complaints, and miscarriages of
justice, or too severe sentences, any one

149

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

of which might require hours and some-
times days to investigate. He is assisted
by several officers, but, strange to say, it is
no part of their qualifications (or that of the
Home Secretary himself), that they should
be familiar with the criminal law or the
prosecution or defense of prisoners. These
permanent officials are, besides, occupied
with hundreds of other matters which come
before the Home Office, on which they
have to guide their chief. Think of the
untold sufferings of individuals and fami-
lies, the shame and degradation which they
would be spared, if England had a court
of criminal appeal.

Historic Examples of British Injustice

The Home Office detects and corrects a
larger number of erroneous verdicts than
the public is aware. This arises from
the secret and partial methods of reme-
dying miscarriages of justice frequent-
ly adopted. The first object is to main-

150

EXAMPLES OF BRITISH INJUSTICE

tain the public belief in the infallibility of
judges and juries. If an innocent person
could slip out quietly, without shaking this
belief, he might be permitted to do so.
The Home Secretary is, in fact, a politi-
cian, who has little time to spare for the
consideration of criminal cases, and further-
more must see to it that his conduct does
not injure his party. Thus he is often de-
terred from interfering with verdicts and
sentences by sheer timidity. When he
affirms a sentence he can throw the greater
part of the blame on others if he is after-
ward proved to be wrong ; but when he re-
verses either verdict or sentence, he must
take the whole responsibility upon himself.
This is, I believe, the true explanation of
the secret and partial reversals which are
not unusual at the Home Office. The
Home Secretary, as well as his subordi-
nates, must frequently let " dare not wait
upon I would."

If a crime is committed and no one is
brought to justice, the police are blamed ;

151

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

but if a person is convicted the police
are praised, without regard as to whether
the right person has been convicted.
Hence there is usually a strong efifort to
beat up evidence against the person sus-
pected, as in my case and that of Adolf
Beck (see page 155), and to keep back any-
thing in favor of the prisoner that comes
to the knowledge of the police. When an
appeal is made from the verdict to the
Home Secretary, the first step is to consult
the very judge who is responsible, in nine
cases out of ten, for the erroneous verdict.
It is easy to see that, where such reference
is made, the judge is liable to be biased in
support of his own rulings. How much
more the ends of justice would be furthered
by having the case retried I

God only knows how many men and
women have been innocent of the charges
brought against them, and for which
they have been unjustly punished. I will
mention a few only of many cases on
record.

152

EXAMPLES OF BRITISH INJUSTICE

A man, Hebron by name, was convicted
at Manchester, of murder. He was sen-
tenced to death, but fortunately this was
commuted to penal servitude for life.
After serving two years the real murderer,
a man named Peace, was discovered, and
Hebron was " graciously pardoned."

Another cruel case was that of John
Kensall, who was convicted of murder,
but, through action taken by the late Lord
Chief Justice Russell, was shown to be
innocent. The Home Office could not at
first " see its way to interfere," and had it
not been for Lord Russell's clear head and
splendid generalship, by which the authori-
ties at the Home Office were outwitted,
he would not have been released so soon.

The case of the man Hay, wrongly con-
victed, was of a serious nature, showing
that he was the victim of a conspiracy;
yet had it not been for Sir William Har-
court's instituting an investigation inde-
pendent of the Home Office, it is very
doubtful whether Hay would have been

153

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

able to establish his inncx:ence. But he
did so, and a pardon was granted him.

It looks almost as if justice in England
were growing of late more than ordinarily
blind. Thrice, within three years, has the
Home Secretary's " pardon " been granted
to men found to have been wrongfully con-
victed.

The averag'e man takes it for granted
that these hideous mistakes must, of neces-
sity, be few and far between ; but the crim-
inologist knows better. He, at all events,
is well aware that every year a number of
innocent people are sentenced to suffer
either an ignominious death upon the
scaffold, or the long-drawn-out living death
of penal servitude.

Many of these judicial miscarriages nev-
er come to light at all. Others are pur-
posely glossed over by the powers that be.
But occasionally one occurs of so appalling
a nature that it rivets the attention and
shocks the conscience of the entire civil-
ized world, as in the case of Adolf Beck.

154

THE CASE OF ADOLF BECK

The Case of Adolf Beck

Adolf Beck was twice convicted for
crimes committed by a man who somewhat
resembled him. He served his first sen-
tence and had been convicted for a second
crime on " misrepresented identity " when
his innocence was providentially estab-
lished. The case is too lengthy for detailed
account in these pages, and I shall content
myself in giving the summing-up of Mr.
George R. Sims in the pamphlet reprinted
from his presentation of the case in the
columns of The Daily Mail of London :

" I have told in plain words the story of
a foul wrong done to an innocent man.

" I have proved beyond all question that
Adolf Beck was in 1896, by the Common
Sergeant, Sir Forrest Fulton, at the Old
Bailey, sentenced to seven years' penal ser-
vitude for being an ex-convict named John
Smith.

" I have proved that he was not found
guilty of being John Smith by the jury.

15s

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

" The former conviction for which Mr.
Adolf Beck was sentenced and punished
was not only never submitted to the jury,
but they were warned by the judge that
they were not to take the issue of Beck
being Smith into consideration in arriving
at their verdict. They were to dismiss k
completely from their minds.

" I have proved that if this issue had
been left for the jury to consider they must
have acquitted Mr. Beck, who showed by
an indisputable alibi that he could not be
Smith, the man convicted in 1877.

" I have proved that this terrible mock-
ery of justice, the conviction of an inno-
cent man for a series of crimes that it was
quite impossible he could have committed,
was brought about by the action of the
leading counsel for the Treasury, which
action was supported by the Common Ser-
geant, Sir Forrest Fulton.

" I have proved that the evidence of the
policeman, Eliss Spurrell, which was used
at the police-court to assist in getting Beck
committed for trial, was kept out at the Old
Bailey, where it would have insured Beck's
acquittal.

156

THE CASE OF ADOLF BECK

" I have proved that at the poHce-court
in 1896 Mr. Gurrin, the Treasury expert,
reported that all the documents connected
with the 1896 frauds were in the handwrit-
ing of John Smith of 1877,

" I have proved that at the 1896 trial at
the Old Bailey Mr. Gurrin swore that, to
the best of his belief, all the documents
were in the disguised handwriting of Mr.
Beck.

" I have proved that no one in his senses
could at the trial have accepted the theory
that Adolf Beck was John Smith after lis-
tening to the evidence of Major Lindholm,
Gentleman of the Chamber to the King of
Denmark, Col. Josiah Harris, and the Con-
sul-General for Peru at Liverpool.

"The Common Sergeant accepted as
true their evidence of a complete alibi for
Mr. Beck, so far as 1877 and the years
Smith was in prison were concerned, or he
would, it is to be presumed, have taken
measures to have those gentlemen prose-
cuted for committing wilful and corrupt
perjury in order to defeat the ends of jus-
tice.

" I have proved that Beck, after his im-

157

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

prisonment, compelled the Home Office
authorities to acknowledge that he was not
Smith, and to admit the physical impos-
sibility of his being Smith — Smith was
a Jew, and he, Beck, was not — and that
therefore, by the evidence of the Treasury
witnesses, he had been wrongfully com-
mitted,

" I have proved that Beck was stripped
and officially examined for body marks be-
fore his trial, in order that such marks
might be compared with those on the rec-
ord in the possession of the authorities as
the body marks of John Smith.

" I have proved that Adolf Beck had
none of the body marks of John Smith, the
man in whose handwriting Mr. Gurrin had
declared the incriminating documents of
1896 to be.

" I have proved that all the petitions set-
ting forth these facts and others, which
fully established Beck's innocence, met
with no consideration.

" I have proved that when the frauds of
1877 and 1896 were repeated in 1904, and
the incriminating documents were found
to be in the handwriting of 1877, stroke for

158

THE CASE OF ADOLF BECK

stroke, peculiarity for peculiarity, almost
word for word, the fact that the authorities
had admitted that Mr. Beck could not be
the author of the 1877 frauds or the writer
of the 1877 documents was utterly ignored,
and the responsible authorities, with every
proof of Mr. Beck's innocence in their
possession, allowed him to be arrested,
charged, tried, and convicted again.

" I have proved that the identification of
Mr. Beck by the female witnesses as the
man who robbed them was a monstrous
farce.

"I have proved that, so far from Mr.
Beck being the ' double ' of John Smith, he
was utterly unlike him, except that each
had a gray mustache. Beck had neither
the noticeable scar at the point of the jaw
nor the noticeable wart over one eye that
are striking marks of identity in John
Smith — marks which would not escape the
most casual observer.

" I have proved that Beck's conviction in
1896 was secured by a device which was
utterly unworthy of a British court of jus-
tice — a device so unfair and unjust that an
innocent and inoffensive foreigner, a Nor-

159

. I

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

wegian who had sought the hospitality ol
our shores, was by its employment sent into
penal servitude for seven years for the
crimes of another man.

" I have proved that Mr. Beck was in
1904 convicted of repeating letter for letter,
word for word, trick for trick, check for
check, false address for false address, false
name for false name, the frauds of 1877 and
1896, of which the authorities had absolute
proof that he was innocent, and of which,
though they had never remitted one day of
his sentence, they had admitted that he was
innocent.

" I have been careful to keep to the main
issue, and have refrained from examining
the side issues, some of which reveal most
lamentable features in connection with our
criminal procedure.

" I will prove one thing more, and leave
the facts I have established to the judg-
ment of the public.

" At the end of the report of the second

trial of Adolf Beck, which took place at

the Old Bailey on June 27, 1904 (Sessions

Paper CXL., Part 837), are these words,

printed as I give them below:

160

THE CASE OF ADOLF BECK

"^GUILTY. He then PLEADED
GUILTY to a conviction of obtaining
goods by false pretenses at this Court on
February 26^ i8g6. fudgment respited^

" Pleaded guilty to a former conviction !
Adolf Beck pleaded guilty to nothing.
How could he plead guilty, being an in-
nocent man! He cried aloud when the
charge of the first conviction was read
aloud to him, ' As God is my witness, I
was innocent then as I am innocent now.'

" The epilogue to the tragedy of our
English Dreyfus is written in those damn-
ing words in the Sessions Paper, the offi-
cial minutes of evidence in Central Crimi-
nal Court trials.

" Beck's last hope had perished. Once
more a merciless fate had blinded the eyes
and closed the ears of Justice to his inno-
cence. He was to be immured in a con-
vict cell for ten, perhaps for fourteen,
years ; he was to pass the closing years of
his life a branded felon amid all the hor-
rors of a convict prison. In all human
probability he would die without ever see-
ing the light of freedom again, for he could

not have borne this second torture.
II 161

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

" His voice, crying aloud for freedom,
would be heard no more. Petitions for a
reinvestigation of his case would be hope-
less. He had been robbed of his last
earthly chance of proving his innocence.

" Those words, ' The prisoner pleaded
guilty to a former conviction,' would have
damned him to the last day of his life.
My painful task is ended.
A foreigner, a stranger within our gates,
a man of kindly heart and gentle ways, has
been foully wronged. There is but one
reparation we can make him. The people
of this country owe him a testimonial of
sympathy that shall endure and remain.
On the site of his martyrdom there should
rise a national monument. Let that monu-
ment take the form of a Court of Criminal
Appeal. That is the one reparation that
the English people can make to Adolf
Beck for the foul wrong he has sufiEered in
their midst."

In a sense the innocent man who is
hanged may be regarded as better off than
he who is called upon to endure lifelong
imprisonment. There are plenty of exam-

162

EXAMPLES OF BRITISH INJUSTICE

pies of these judicial murders. Over a
score of undoubted cases occurred in the
first two decades of the last century, and
since then there have been twice as many
more. A notorious and awful case was
that of Eliza Penning, who, at eighteen
years of age, was sent to the gallows upon
the perjured evidence of an accomplice of
the real murderer. The latter afterward
confessed.

Another similar case occurred in 1850,
when a man named Ross was executed for
poisoning his young wife by mixing arsenic
with her food. A few years later certain
facts came to light, proving conclusively
that the real criminal was a female acquaint-
ance and confidante of the dead woman.

Thomas Ferryman, again, was found
gfuilty in 1879 of the murder of his aged
mother on the very flimsiest of evidence.
His sentence was commuted to penal serv-
itude for life, and in the ordinary course of
events he should now be free. More than
100,000 people have, at different times,

163

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

petitioned for the release of this convict,
and the highest judicial authorities have
expressed their belief in his entire inno-
cence of the crime imputed to him. Yet
he has been compelled to drink his terrible
cup to the bitter dregs.

In 1844 a gentleman named Barker was
sentenced to penal servitude for life for a
forgery of which he was afterward proved
to have been wholly innocent. He served
four years, and was then released and re-
admitted to practise as an attorney. In
1859, eleven years after having been "par-
doned," he was, upon the recommenda-
tion of a Select Committee of the House
of Commons, voted a sum of ;^5,ooo, "as a
national acknowledgment of the wrong he
had suffered from an erroneous prosecu-
tion."

The famous Edlingham case will doubt-
less be fresh in the minds of most people.
In February, 1879, the village vicarage was
entered by burglars, and a determined at-
tempt was made to murder the aged in-

164

EXAMPLES OF BRITISH INJUSTICE

cumbent. For this outrage two men,
Brannagham and Murphy, were sentenced
to lifelong imprisonment. After a lapse
of nine years the crime was confessed to
by two well-known criminals named Rich-
ardson and Edgell, the result being that
the innocent convicts were released, with
an honorarium of ;^8oo apiece.

The eminent King's Counsel, Sir George
Lewis, has openly said that he will not al-
low himself to speak of the way in which
the " Edal ji " trial was conducted, and he
further adds: "I have it on undoubted
authority that every ' M.P.' connected with
the legal profession believes as I do that
that man is innocent. And yet a declara-
tion from such a source is allowed by the
public to pass unnoticed. As I have be-
fore stated, ' it is not the business of the
public, nor of individual citizens, to prove
the innocence of any unhappy person
whom the process of law selects for pun-
ishment; but it is the business of every
citizen to see that the courts incontestably

165

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

prove the guilt of any person accused of a
crime before sentence is passed.' Neither
condition was fulfilled in the case of the
prisoner. I have studied the evidence,
and say, from knowledge gained by fif-
teen years' association with criminals, that
this unfortunate young man is innocentr
Surely after the disclosures of the Adolf
Beck case this one, on the word of Sir
George Lewis, ought to receive unbiased
consideration from the Home Office.

i66

CHAPTER EIGHT
Religion in Prison Life

Dedication of New Chapel

ON our arrival at Aylesbury Prison
there was no chapel. Divine serv-
ice was held in one of the halls, in which
the prisoners assembled each morning for
twenty minutes of service. This arrange-
ment had many disadvantages, and one of
the ladies on the Board of Visitors came
nobly to our relief with an offer to provide
the prison with a chapel. The Home
Office " graciously " accepted this generous
proposition, and twelve months later it was
completed and dedicated by the Lord Bish-
op of Reading. (It was burned to the
ground since my departure from Ayles-
bury.)
On the day preceding the ceremony I

167

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

was asked to assist in decorating the chapel
with flowers kindly sent by Lady Roth-
schild. It was a delicate expression of sym-
pathy for the prisoners, which she repeated
on all high festival days. She was deeply
affected when I told her how profoundly
the women appreciated her recognition of
a common humanity.

On the appointed day all work was sus-
pended to enable the prisoners to be pres-
ent. In the galleries were seated the fam-
ilies of the governor, chaplain, and doctor ;
at the right of the altar the generous donor
of the chapel, Adeline, Duchess of Bed-
ford, was seated with her friends. The or-
ganist played a prelude, and then the bish-
op, accompanied by the chaplain and the
clergymen of the diocese, entered the
chapel. After a hymn had been sung, a
short service followed, and then the bishop
stepped forward and, facing the altar, read
the " dedication service." It was most im-
pressive. Then followed a prayer and a
hymn, and the service was over. The pris-

i68

INFLUENCE OF RELIGION

oners filed back to their respective cells and
the visitors made the tour of the prison.

I was a patient in the infirmary at the
time, but had received permission to attend
the chapel. Before the Bishop of Reading
left the prison he visited the sick, and as
he passed my cell he stopped and spoke to
me words of hope and encouragement, add-
ing his blessing.

Influence of Religion upon Prisoners

Another occasion on which the Bishop
of Reading visited the prison was the hold-
ing of a confirmation service. Many wom-
en of earnest minds in prison sought in this
manner to prove the sincerity of their re-
pentance and their resolution to live godly
lives; and, with one exception, all those
confirmed that day have remained true to
their profession.

Penal servitude is a fiery test of one's re-
ligious convictions. One's faith is either

strengthened and deepened or else it goes

169

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

under altogether. I have witnessed many a
sad spiritual shipwreck within those walls.

On a dark, gloomy day in October the
rain pattered against the window of my cell
and the wind howled dismally around that
huge " house of sorrow." Now and then
the sound of weeping broke upon the still-
ness, and I prayed in my heart for the poor
souls in travail whose pains had broken
through the enforced rule of silence.
There is no sound in all the world so ut-
terly unnerving as the hopeless sob of the
woman in physical isolation who may not
be spiritually comforted. Separated from
loved ones, beyond the reach of tender
hands and voices, she has no one, as in
former years, to share her sufferings or
minister to her pain. Alone, one of a
mass, with no one to care but the good
God above^ for "to suffer" thus is the
punishment that man has decreed.

The humanizing influences, in my opin-
ion, can be brought to bear upon prison-
ers with beneficial results only when sup-

170

INFLUENCE OF RELIGION

ported by the advantages of religious teach-
ings. During the early part of my sen-
tence there were Scripture readers, laymen
and laywomen, in all convict prisons, to
assist the chaplain in his arduous duties;
but, on the ground of expense, these have
been dispensed with, thus practically re-
moving the only means of administering
the moral medicine which is essential to
the cure of the habitual prisoner's mental
disease.

A large amount of crime is due to
physical and mental degeneration. Never-
theless, crime is also the result of love-
lessness, when it is not a disease, and
the true curative system should give birth
to love in human souls. There is not a
man or woman living so low but we can
do something to better him or her, if we
give love and sympathy in the service and
have an all-embracing a£Fection for both
God and man.

If the future system is to treat the crim-
inal in a curative or reformative way,

I7X

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

rather than by punitive methods, the means
to this end must certainly be increased*
Even the worst woman can be approached
throuj:h the emotional side of her nature.
A kind word, a sympathetic look, a smile,
a little commendation now and then, given
by the officers in charge, would soon gain
the respect and confidence of the pris-
oner, and thereby render her the more
amenable to rules and regulations. A
prisoner with whom I worked, and whose
inner life by near association was re-
vealed to me, had got into a very morbid,
depressed state of mind. She was under
close observation by the doctor's orders.
Her penal record was net a good one; her
hasty temper was continually getting her
into trouble, and when she was punished
she would brood over it.

Suicide of a Prisoner

One day she asked for permission to

see me; the permission was refused. She

made the request a second time, and, the

172

SUICIDE OF A PRISONER

fact coming to the knowledge of the chap-
lain, he advised that it be granted, believ-
ing, from his personal knowledge of my in-
fluence in the prison, that it would have a
beneficial effect I was allowed to see her,
and after a few minutes' conversation she
appeared brighter. I told her that the peo-
ple of God have a promise of a Comforter
from heaven to come to them and abide
with them, even in tribulation and in pris-
on. She promised me she would try to be
more submissive and accept her punish-
ment in a better spirit. For several days
after she seemed to improve. But one
afternoon she once more made the request
to be allowed to see me. As none of the
authorities were in the building at the time,
and the chief matron could not take upon
herself the responsibility of granting the
request, it was refused. I felt rather anx-
ious about it, but was helpless. At five
o'clock that evening, just before supper
was served, the woman was found dead in
her cell ; she had hanged herself to the win-

173

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

dow. She was only twenty-four years of
age, and was serving a five years* sentence
for shooting her betrayer under great prov-
ocation. The tragedy was naturally kept
quiet; none of the prisoners knew of it
until the following morning. How the
truth got abroad I do not know, but when
the doors were unlocked after breakfast,
instead of the women passing out of their
cells in the usual orderly way, they rushed
out, shouting excitedly at the top of their

voices : " M has hanged herself ; . . .

she was driven to it 1 " In vain the officers
tried to pacify them or to explain the true
state of things ; they would not listen, and
continued to scream : " Don't talk to us —
you are paid to say that ! If you did not
say that it was all right you would be
turned out of the gates I " And the uproar
increased. As I have already stated, the
" Star Class " was sandwiched between two
wards of habitual criminals, and we had the
benefit of every disturbance. During the
excitement one of the ringleaders caught

174

TRAGEDIES IN PRISON

sight of me and shouted : " Mrs. Maybrick,

is it true that M was driven to it?"

The tumult was increasing and was grow-
ing beyond the control of the warder,
when the chief matron, becoming alarmed,
sent up word that I might explain to the
women. Accompanied by an officer, I
did so, and in a few minutes the uproar
calmed down and the women returned
quietly to their cells. I have reason to
believe that I always had the full confi-
dence of my fellow prisoners; they were
quick to know and appreciate that I had
their welfare at heart, and that I never
countenanced any disobedience or breach
of the rules. A first offender, under sen-
tence for many years, will suffer from the
punishment according as she maintains or
damages her self-respect.

Tragedies in Prison

Above others there are four tragic prison
episodes which, once witnessed, can never
be forgotten:

175

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

1 . Breaking bad news to a prisoner — ^tell-
ing her that a dear one in the outside world
is dying, and that she may not go to him ;
that she must wait in terrible suspense
until the last message is sent, no communi-
cation in the mean time being permitted.

2. Receiving an intimation of the death
of a beloved father, mother, brother or sis-
ter, husband or child, whose visits and let-
ters have been the sole comfort and sup-
port of that prisoner's hard lot.

3. The loss of reason by a prisoner who
was not strong enough to endure the pun-
ishment decreed by Act of Parliament.

4. The suicide, who prefers to trust to
the mercy of God rather than suffer at the
hands of man.

Why should a woman be considered less
loving, less capable of sufiFering, because
she is branded with the name of " convict ?"
She may be informed that her nearest and
dearest are dying, but the rules will permit
no departure to relieve the heart-breaking
suspense. In the world at large telegnuns

176

TRAGEDIES IN PRISON

may be sent and daily bulletins received,
but not in the convict's world.

Death is a solemn event under any cir-
cumstances, and reverence for the dead is
inculcated by our religion, but to die in
prison is a thing that every inmate dreads
with inexpressible horror. When a pris-
oner is at the point of death, she is put into
a cell alone, or into a ward, if there is one
vacant. There she lies alone. The nurse
and infirmary officers come and go; her
fellow prisoners gladly minister to her ; the
doctor and chaplain are assiduous in their
attentions; but she is nevertheless alone,
cut off from her kin, tended by the servants
of the law instead of the servants of love,
and it is only at the very last that her loved
ones may come and say their farewell. Oh !
the pathos, the anguish of such partings —
who shall describe them ? And when all is
over, and the law has no longer any power
over the body it has tortured, it may be
claimed and taken away.

The case of the prisoner who becomes
12 177

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

insane is no less harrowing. She is kept
in the infirmary with the other patients for
three months. • If she does not recover her
reason within that period, she is certified
by three doctors as insane and then re-
moved to the criminal lunatic asylum. In
the mean time the peace and rest of the
other sick persons in the infirmary are dis-
turbed by her ravings, and their feelings
wrought upon by the daily sight of a de-
mented fellow creature.

And the suicide! To see the ghastly
and distorted features of a fellow prisoner,
with whom one has worked and suffered,
killed by her own hands — ^such scenes as
these haunted me for weeks ; and it needed
all my reliance on God to throw off the de-
pression that inevitably followed.

Moral Effect of Harsh Prison Regime

Have you ever tried to realize what kind
of life that must be in which the sight of a
child's face and the sound of a child's voice

178

EFFECT OF HARSH PRISON REGIME

are ever absent ; in which there are none
of the sweet influences of the home ; the
daily intercourse with those we love; the
many trifling little happenings, so unim-
portant in themselves, but which go so far
to make up the sum of human happiness ?
It commences with the clangor of bells and
the jingling of keys, and closes with the
banging of hundreds of doors, while the
after silence is broken only by shrieks and
blasphemies, the trampling of many feet,
and the orders of warders.

In the winter the prisoners get up in the
dark, and breakfast in the dark, to save
the expense of gas. The sense of touch
becomes very acute, as so much has to be
done without light. Until I had served
three years of my sentence I had not been
allowed to see my own face. Then a look-
ing-glass, three inches long, was placed in
my cell. I have often wondered how this
deprivation , could be harmonized with a
purpose to enforce tidiness or cleanliness
in a prisoner. The obvious object in de-

179

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

priving prisoners of the only means through
which they can reasonably be expected to
conform to the official standard of facial
cleanliness is to eradicate woman's assumed
innate sense of vanity ; but whether or no
it succeeds in this, certain it is that cleanli-
ness becomes a result of compulsion rather
than of a natural womanly impulse. Also
she must maintain the cleanliness of her
prison cell on an ounce of soap per week.
After I left Aylesbury I heard that the stew-
ard had received orders from the Home
Office to reduce this enormous quantity.
If true it will leave the unfortunate prison-
ers with three-quarters of an ounce of soap
weekly wherewith to maintain that cleanli-
ness which is said to be next to godliness.
The prisoners are allowed a hot bath once
a week, but in the interval they may not
have a drop of hot water, except by the
doctor's orders.

i8o

ATTACKS OF LEVITY

Attacks of Levity

All human instincts can not be crushed,
even by an act of Parliament, and sometimes
the prisoners indulge in a flight of levity,
which is, however, promptly stopped by the
officer in charge. But even wilfulness and
levity are to some a relief from the perpet-
ual silence. A young girl, fifteen years of
age, came in on a conviction of penal serv-
itude for life. In a fit of passion she had
strangled a child of which she had charge.
In consideration of her youth and the med-
ical evidence adduced at her trial, sentence
of death was commuted. She was in the
" Star Class," and it aroused my indignation
to witness her sufferings. A mature woman
may submit to the inevitable patiently, as an
act of faith or as a proof of her philosophy ;
but a child of that age has neither faith nor
philosophy sufficient to support her against
this repressive system of torture. At times,
however, the girl had attacks of levity which
manifested themselves in most amusing

i8i

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

ways. One day she was put out to work
in the officers' quarters and told to black-
lead a grate. With a serious face she set to
work. Presently the officer asked whether
she had finished her task, to which she
meekly replied "Yes," at the same time
lifting her face, which, to the utter amaze-
ment of the female warder, had been trans-
formed from a white to a brightly polished
black one.

On another occasion she was told that
she would be wanted in the infirmary.
She was suffering great pain at the time,
and had begged the doctor to extract a
tooth. When the infirmary nurse un-
locked her door she was found in bed.
This is strictly against the rules, unless the
prisoner has special permission from the
doctor to lie down during the day. Of
course, the officer ordered her to get up
at once, to which she replied, " I can't."
" Why not? " asked the officer. " Because
I can't," the girl repeated. Whereupon
the officer lifted o£E the bed covering to see

182

ATTACKS OF LEVITY

what was amiss. To her astonishment she
saw that the child had got inside the mat-
tress (which I described in the beginning
as a long sack stuffed with the fiber of the
coconut), and had drawn the end of it on
a string around her neck, so that nothing
but her head was visible.

It has been said that no apples are so
sweet as those that are stolen, and the
great pleasure the women in prison derive
from their surreptitious levity is because it
can so rarely be indulged in, and the oppor-
tunities for its expression must always be
stolen.

There is an axiom in prison, " The worse
the woman, the better the prisoner." As
one goes about the prison, and observes
those women who are permitted little privi-
leged tasks, such as tidying the garden,
cleaning the chapel, or any of the light and
semi-responsible tasks which convicts like,
one will notice the privileged are not, as a
rule, the young or respectably brought
up, but old, professional criminals. They

183

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

know the rules of the prison, they spend
the greater part of their lives there, and
they know exactly how to behave so as to
earn the maximum of marks ; their object
is to get out in the shortest possible time,
and to have as light work as possible while
they are in. The officers like them be-
cause they know their work without hav-
ing to be taught, "There is no servant
like an old thief," I have heard it said.
" They do good work/* This is quite typi-
cal of a certain kind of prisoner who is the
mainstay of the prisons.

The conviction of young girls to penal
servitude is shocking, for it destroys the
chief power of prevention that prisons are
supposed to possess, and accustoms the
young criminal to a reality which has far
less terror for her than the idea of it had.
Prison life is entirely demoralizing to any
girl under twenty years of age, and it is to
prevent such demoralizing influence upon
young girls that some more humane sys-
tem of punishment should be enacted,

184

SELF-DISCIPLINE

Self-Discipline

In saying a word on what is, perhaps,
best described as "prison self -discipline,"
I trust the reader will acquit me of any mo-
tive other than a desire that it may result
in some sister in misfortune deriving bene-
fit from a similar course. That the state
of mind in which one enters upon the life
of a convict has some influence on conduct
— whether she does so with a conscious-
ness of innocence or otherwise — should,
perhaps, go without saying. Nevertheless,
innocent or guilty, a proper self-respect can
not fail to be helpful, be the circumstances
what they may; and from the moment I
crossed Woking's grim threshold until the
last day when I passed from the shadow
and the gloom of Aylesbury into God's free
sunlight, I adhered strictly to a determina-
tion that I would come out of the ordeal —
if ever— precisely as I had entered upon it ;
that no loving eyes of mother or friends
should detect in my habits, manners, or

185

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

modes of thought or expression the slight-
est deterioration.

Accordingly I set about from the very
start to busy myself — and this was no small
helpfulness in filling the dreary hours of
the seemingly endless days of solitary conr
finement— keeping my cell in order and
ever making the most of such scant mate-
rial for adornment as the rules permitted.
Little enough in this way, it may be imag-
ined, falls to a convict's lot. Indeed, the
sad admission is forced that nearly every
semblance of refinement is maintained at
one's peril, for "motives" receive small
consideration in the interpretation of pris-
on rules, however portentously they may
have loomed in the process that placed an
innocent woman under the shadow of the
scaflFold, and only by grace of a commuta-
tion turned her into a " life " convict.

Come what would, I was determined not
to lose my hold on the amenities of my
former social position, and, though I had
only a wooden stool and table, they were

i86

SELF-DISCIPLINE

always spotless, my floor was ever brightly
polished, while my tin pannikins went far
to foster the delusion that I was in posses-
sion of a service of silver.

Confinement in a cell is naturally produc-
tive of slothful habits and indifference to
personal appearance. I felt it would be a
humiliation to have it assumed that I could
or would deteriorate because of my envi-
ronment. I therefore made it a point never
to yield to that feeling of indifference
which is the almost universal outcome of
prison life. I soon found that this self-im-
posed regimen acted as a wholesome moral
tonic, and so, instead of falling under the
naturally baneful influences of my sur-
roundings, I strove, with ever- renewed
spiritual strength, to rise above them. At
first the difference that marked me from
so many of my fellow prisoners aroused in
them something like a feeling of resent-
ment ; but when they came to know me
this soon wore off, and I have reason to
believe that my example of unvarjring neat-

187

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

ness and civility did not fail in influen-
cing others to look a bit more after their
personal appearance and to modify their
speech. At any rate, it had this effect:
Aylesbury Prison is the training-school for
female warders for all county prisons.
Having served a month's probation here,
they are recommended, if efficient in en-
forcing the prison "discipline," for trans-
ference to analogous establishments in the
counties. It happened not infrequently,
therefore, that new-comers were taken to
my cell as the model on which all others
should be patterned.

I partook of my meals, coarse and unap-
petizing as the food might be, after the
manner I had been wont in the dining-
room of my own home ; and, though un-
seen, I never permitted myself to use my
fingers (as most prisoners invariably did)
where a knife, fork, or spoon would be
demanded by good manners. Neither did
I permit myself, either at table (though
alone) or elsewhere, to fall into slouchy at-

i88

NEED OF WOMEN DOCTORS

titudes, even when, because of sickness, it
was nearly impossible for me to hold up
my head.

I speak of this because of the almost uni-
versal tendency among prisoners to mere
animality. " What matters it? " is the gen-
eral retort. Accordingly, the average con-
vict keeps herself no cleaner than the dis-
cipline strenuously exacts, while all their
attitudes express hopeless indifference, cal-
lous carelessness, to a degree that often
lowers them to the behavior of the brutes
of the field. The repressive system can
neither reform nor raise the nature or hab-
its of prisoners.

Need of Women Doctors and
Inspectors

Women doctors and inspectors should
be appointed in all female prisons. Other-
wise what can be expected of a woman of
small mental resources, shut in on herself,
often unable to read or write with any
readiness ; of bad habits ; with a craving for

189

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

low excitement ; whose chief pleasure has
been in the grosser kind of animal delight ?
The mind turns morbidly inward; the
nerves are shattered. Although the dark
cell is no longer used, mental light is still
excluded. Recidivation is more frequent
with women than with men. The jail
taint seems to sink deeper into woman's
nature, and at Aylesbury numbers of the
more abandoned ones are seldom for long
out of the male warders' hands.

Chastening Effect of Imprisonment on

THE Spirit

For a considerable period I was given
work in the officers' mess. Their quarters
are in a detached building within the prison
precincts, and are reached by crossing a
small grass-plot which separates it from the
prison. Each officer has a small bedroom,
in which she sleeps and passes her time
when off duty. All meals are served in
the mess-room, and consist of breakfast at

190

NEED OF WOMEN DOCTORS

seven o'clcx:k, lunch on turn between nine
and eleven, dinner at twelve-thirty, tea at
five, and supper whenever they are off
duty. The cooking is excellent and varied.
A matron is in charge of the commissariat
department, and has four prisoners of the
"Star Class" working under her. I did
scullery work, which consisted of washing
up all the crockery, glass, knives, forks,
and spoons used at these five meals, be-
sides all the pots and pans required in their
preparation. As a staff of twenty-five sat
down to these frequent meals daily, the
work was very hard and quite beyond my
strength. The "Star Class" of workers
should not be kept at it more than six
months at a time. Some of the life women
have been in the kitchen and mess-room as
long as three and four years, and, as neither
the culinary arrangements nor the ventila-
tion are modem, the consequent physical
and mental depression arising from these
defects, and the monotony of the work, is
only too apparent.

191

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

I was not feeling well at the time, and
soon after I had a long illness — a nervous
breakdown, due partly to insomnia and
partly to the unrelieved strain and stress
of years of hard labor. My recovery was
very slow. I was in the infirmary about
eighteen months^ and was glad when final-
ly discharged, as the intervals between
my letters and visits were shorter when
I was in discipline quarters and could
earn more marks. During the long years
of my imprisonment I learned many les-
sons I needed, perhaps, to have learned
during my earlier life ; but, thank God, I
was no criminal! I was being punished
for that of which I was innocent. I be-
lieve it is God's task to judge and ours to
endure, but I could not understand what
his plans and his purposes were^ I be-
lieved they were good, although I could
not see how eternity itself could make up
for my sufferings. Perhaps they were in-
tended to Work out some good to others^

by ways I should never know, until I saw

192

A DEATH-BED INCIDENT

with the clear eyes of another world. Still,
the external conditions of life acted on my
body and mind, and I scarcely knew at
times how to bear them. I could not have
endured them without God's sustaining
grace. I used often to repeat these lines :

^ WitJi patience, then, the course of duty run ;
God never does nor suffers to be done
But that which you Would do if you could see
The end of ^U ^vettU as well as h^.**

A Death-bed Incident

A woman lay dying in a near-by cell.
Of th€ sixty years of hef life she had spent
forty within pvisOn walls* What that life

had been I will not say, but when she was
in the agony of death dhe called to me ! ** I
don*t know anything about youf God, but
if he had made you tended and loving to a
bad lot likig me, I know he will not be hard
on a poor soul who never had a chance.
Give me a kids, dear lass, before I go. No
one ha» kissed nae since my mother died."
13 «93

CHAPTER NINE
My Last Years in Prison

I AM Set to Work in the Library

WHEN I recovered from my nervous
breakdown, by medical order I
was given lighter employment, and went
into the library. I was now the only pris-
oner in the building who had suflFered un-
der the hardships of the old system at
Woking Prison, all the rest of those who
came with me having in the interim re-
turned to the world. In fact, I was the
only one who had served over ten years.

My task in the library was to assist the
schoolmistress and to change the library
books twice a week. They were carried
from cell to cell, and this represented the
handling of over two hundred and fifty
books. In addition to this, I had to be

194

SET TO WORK IN THE LIBRARY

"literary nurse," whose duties were to at-
tend to worn-out books, binding up their
wounds and prolonging their days of use-
fulness ; doing cataloguing and entry work ;
to print the name of each prisoner on a
card placed over her cell door; to copy
hymns, and to make scrap-books for the
illiterate prisoners, besides other miscella-
neous duties.

The library was a very good one and
contained not only the latest novels, but
philosophical works and books for study ;
also a limited number in French and
German. To these were added religious
works, especially poetry, and sermons for
Sunday reading. I found a choice collec-
tion to help me support the Sabbath day,
for the suspended animation makes a day of
misery of the " day of rest." One could not
read all day without tiring, and the absence
of week-day work usually made it a day of
heavy, creeping depression. There are two
periods of exercise, and chapel morning and
afternoon. The remainder of the time the

195

. I

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

prisoners are locked in their cells. Read-
ing was my only solace ; from first to last I
read every moment that I could call my
own. The best index of the quality of the
books was that every volume was read or
examined by the chaplain and his staff be^
fore it was admitted to the library. If it
contained any articles on prison life or
matters relating to prisoners, these were
always carefully cut out.

From my observations I consider that
prison schoolmasters and schoolmistresses
are overburdened with miscellaneous and
incompatible duties. No one needs to be
told that the average prisoner is a slow
learner, and that even a dull boy or girl is
a better pupil than a grown man or woman
plodding along in the first steps of knowl-
edge, and who is taught, not in a class, but
in a cell. Yet the schoolmaster or school-
mistress has to devote hours daily to teach-
ing, to help in letter-writing, in the office
work, in the distribution of library books,
in the library work; and now that their

196

NEWSPAPERS FORBIDDEN

number is likewise reduced on the ground
of expense, the pressure of their work is
out of all proportion to the hours within
which it can be reasonably performed.

I have always been fond of reading, and
during my leisure hours I got through a
large number of books. This was between
noon and half-past one, and seven and
eight in the evening, when my light had to
be put out.

Newspapers Forbidden

The rules forbid that any public news be
conveyed to the prisoners, either at visits
or by letters. This seems to be a very
short-sighted view to take of the matter.
To allow newspapers in the prison might,
of course, lead to cipher communications
to prisoners from their friends; but no
harm can possibly come of allowing infor-
mation regarding public affairs of national
interest to be conveyed through the legiti-
mate channels of letters and visits. It
would give the prisoners fresh food for

197

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

thought, and tend greatly to relieve that
vacuity of mind which is the outcome of
lack of knowledge of external things, and
of the monotony of their lives; it would
also make a pause in their broodings over
their cases, which is the sole subject of
their thoughts and conversations when per-
mitted to converse at all.

How Prisoners Learn of Great

Events

The lowering of the prison flag told us
of the death of Queen Victoria, although
we had heard several days before that she
was sinking. When King Edward was
dangerously ill it was talked of among the
officers, and the prisoners, through me,
asked that special prayers might be said in
the chapel.

When Mafeking was relieved and when
peace with the Boers was declared, flags
were hoisted. Jubilee and Coronation
days were the only occasions I remember

198

DISCIPLINE OF PRISON OFFICERS

when we had any relaxation of prison rules,
and then there was much disappointment,
since in lieu of a mitigation of our sen-
tences, as was the case in India, they gave
us extra meat and plum pudding.

Strict Discipline of Prison Officers

I have served under three governors,
each of whom was an intelligent and con-
spicuously humane man. They knew their
prisoners and tried to understand them,
but there is not much a governor can do
for them of his own initiative. I consider
that he who holds this responsible position
should have more of a free hand, and be
allowed to use his discretion in all ordi-
nary matters pertaining to the prison dis-
cipline and welfare of the prisoners.

They were all advanced disciplinarians.
The routine reeled itself off with mechani-
cal precision. The rules were enforced and
carried out to the letter. The deadly mo-
notony never varied; all days are alike;

X99

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

weeks, months, years slowly accumulate,
and, in th^ mean time, the mental rust is
eating into the weary brain, and the out-
spoken cry rises up daily—" How long, O
Lord ! how long ?"
The officers are almost as keen as the

governor in their efforts to keep things up

to the mark. It is seldom they allow pris-
oners under their observation or supervi-
sion any slight relaxation which nature may
demand, but the rules forbid. They dislike
to punish a woman, and in their hearts
make many excuses for the black sheep.

Their High Character

As a class, with few exceptions, the pris-
on staff is worthy of respect and confi-
dence, and might be trusted with any task.
The patience, civility, and self-control
which the officers exhibit under the most
trying circumstances, as a rule, mark them
as men and women possessing a high sense
of duty, not only as civil servants, but as
Christians.

9Q0

NERVOUS STRAIN OF THEIR DUTIES

Nervous Strain of Their Duties

The hours of work are long, the nervous
strain is incessant. I could wish that those
in high places showed a little more appre-
ciation of what these faithful servants do,
and were not so sparing of their praise and
commendation. The small remuneration
they receive can not make up for the depri-.
vatiqn of the amenities of life which the
prison service entails. Two writers on
prison life have expressed themselves in
widely different ways regarding the ward-
ers and officers. One writer compares
them to slave- and cattle-drivers ; another
expreiises surprise that they are as good as
they are. As, I trust, an impartial ob-
server, I agree with the latter opinion.

Experience has taught mQ thati in most

cases, if the prisoner is amiable and willing,
the officer on her part is ready to meet the
prisoner fully half way — at all events, as far
as circumstances and duty will permit, for
the continual daily changes of duty, from

201

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

ward to ward and hall to hall, make it
nearly impossible for any officer to acquire
a true knowledge of the character of those
under her charge.

It would be interesting if a trained psy-
chologist could watch and report upon the
insidious effect of the repressive rules and
regulations of a prison on the more im-
pressionable officers and prisoners. When
such officers first enter this service they are
natural women with a natural demeanor
and expression of countenance. After a
time, however, the molding effects of
" standing orders " become apparent in the
sternness of their expression, the harsh
tones of their voices, and the abruptness
of their manner.

Standing Orders for Warders

These " standing orders " may be para-
phrased as follows :

" You must not do this or say that, or
look sympathetic or friendly, or converse

2oa

STANDING ORDERS FOR WARDERS

with prisoners in any way. You must
always suspect them of wishing to do some-
thing underhand, sly, and contrary to or-
ders. You must never let them for a mo-
ment out of your sight, or permit ' them to
suppose that you have either trust or con-
fidence in them. It is your duty to see
that the means of punishment devised by
the Penal Code are faithfully carried out.
You are not to trouble yourself about the
result upon the prisoner — that is the affair
of the Government."

Any familiarity on the part of an officer
with a prisoner is strictly forbidden by the
rules of prison service, and the slightest
manifestation of the sort would entail se-
rious punishrnent on the officer. Surely
this is not as it should be ; on the contrary,
greater discretionary power should be per-
mitted to officers in their relations with
prisoners, for the influence for good which
a kind, well-disposed officer could exert
upon a prisoner is incalculable. But all
this possible influence for good is denied

203

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

expression by the spirit of mistrust and
suspicion which pervades the entire prison
administration. This is one of the most
regrettable features of the system. No offi-
cer is trusted by her superior, and no pris-
oner, however exemplary her conduct, may
be trusted by any one officially connected
with the institution.

An officer who commits a breach of any
rule laid down for her may be fined a sum
varying from one to ten shillings, and if
the offense is a grave one she may be dis-
charged.

Crime a Mental Disease

When will those connected with prisons
awake to the fact that the criminal is men-
tally diseased ? Ninety-nine out of a hun-
dred criminals, when not such by accident,
through poverty, or environment, come to
their lot through inherited, malformed
brains. It ought to be the sacred duty of
earnest men to deal kindly, intelligently,
and patiently with them. The prison,

204

CRIME A MENTAL DISEASE

which is now a dreadful place of punish-
ment and humiliation, ought to be made a
home of regeneration and reformation, in
which intelligent effort is made to raise the
prisoner to a higher level ; and this surely
is not done by withdrawing all the refining
influences.

I hope the time is not far off when men
and women will take more of a heart in-
terest in prisoners, and when, no matter
how low they may have sunk, an opportu-
nity to live honestly will be given them
on their release ; when the society against
which they have sinned will treat them so
kindly that for very shame they will seek
to do better, and repentance shall enter
into the most darkened soul. The "eye
for an eye and tooth for a tooth" doc-
trine is not a part of the Christian dispen-
sation. Our Lord Jesus Christ gave his
last supreme lesson, as he turned toward
the thief at his side on the cross, and there
put an end to that old law forever.

205

^ I

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

Something Good in the Worst

Criminal

There is some good to be found in the
worst criminal, which, if nourished by pa-
tience and sympathy, will grow into more
good. I speak from a large, intimate per-
sonal experience, for during my imprison-
ment it was my happy fortune to evoke
kindly reciprocations from some of the
worst and most degraded characters. I
will cite an instance.

One day I was crossing the hall when a
fight occurred. I can not describe it — it
was too horrible. The crowd surged to-
ward me, and I was being drawn in among
the combatants, when one of them, catching
sight of me, stepped out with a face stream-
ing with blood, and pushed me into an open
cell, closing the door after me. When I
thanked her the next day she replied :

" Why, bless your heart, Mrs. Maybrick,
did you think I would let them hurt a hair
of your head ? '*

206

NEED OF FURTHER PRISON REFORM

I believe I had the sympathy and respect
of all my fellow prisoners, and when I left
Aylesbury, my feelings were those of min-
gled relief and regret. I could not but feel
attached to those with whom I had lived
and suffered and worked for so many
weary years. I knew, perhaps, more of
the life history of these poor women, their
inner thoughts and feelings, than any one
else in the prison. In suffering, in sympa-
thy, in pity, we were all akin. In the asso-
ciation hour they would bring me their let-
ters from home to read, and show me the
photographs of their children or other dear
ones, while tears would course down their
cheeks at the memory of happier days.

Need of Further Prison Reform

Many opinions have been written regard-
ing prisons, but with few exceptions they
are the observations of outsiders, which
means, they must of necessity be to a cer-
tain extent superficial.

207

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

I have touched only k few spots of the
gbelat dis^as6d system of prifeoti manage-
ment, but what public opinion did to atn6-
liortite past ibuees^ public opinion can still
do tb im|)it)ve the treatment of tOKiay's
criminal. A little over a hundred years
^o there were thirty^four offenses in Eng^
land punishable by capital punishment.
ToKiay there is only ohei Gharle* Dick-
ens did more than any agency toward io
ing away with inipfisonment for debt^ yet
last yedr there wtefe no iesil than eleven
thousand (Prisoner* in <l:onfint^ment ixyt
debt in English ^risonsw How many of
the«ie havte since joined die tanks of the
criminals through loss of sel^respect?
What has been the effect upon their wives
and families ? Why is a man imprisoned
for debt? Certainly not to enable bim to
pay it. H^ can earti nothing while in |>ris-
on^ where he is supported at the expense
of the state ; and if he has a wife or fatnily^
they either become dependent on the rates,
or incur debts which he will have to pay

208

NEED OF FURTHER PRISON REFORM

on his release. Again, he may not im-
probably lose his emplo5mient, and have to
look out for another when liberated, and
his imprisonment does not make it more
easy, either to procure work or to per-
form it efficiently. The ground of impris-
onment is dishonesty. But is not actual
dishonesty sufficiently met by the criminal
law? In what sense is the debtor dishon-
est ? Is it meant that he has money in his
pocket and refuses to pay his debts? Is
it not rather that he ought to have had
money? It is proved perhaps that he is
earning so much per week, possibly, but
how long had he been earning and how
long was he out of employment before
that? Has he had sickness? There have
been many instances where a man was
in the hospital when the committal order
was made, and was seized and carried
oflF to prison immediately on discharge.
If non-payment of a debt is not a crime,
why is he in prison for it ? If it is a crime,
why has he not the benefit of a trial by
14 209

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

jury on the ability or inability of paying
his debts? And why should not the
Home Oflfice or other appellate tribunal
have the power of revising his sentence?
If the debtor has goods that can be seized,
let them be seized ; if there is money com-
ing to him, let the creditor attach it ; if it
comes within the scope of the bankruptcy
law, let him be adjudicated and examined
on oath to every shilling that he has re-
ceived or spent. But why, in the name of
justice and humanity, treat him as a crimi-
nal, prevent him from earning his bread,
and make him an incumbrance on the State,
exposing his wife and daughter to ruin, de-
grading him, lowering his self-respect, and
subjecting him to the taint of the prison
atmosphere, without satisfactory evidence
of his ability to pay at the time of com-
mittal? Several prisoners that I came in
contact with were made criminals because
their husbands had left their families des-
titute because imprisoned for debt.

2IO

CHAPTER TEN
My Release

I Learn the Time When My Sentence

Will Terminate

AFTER I had been incarcerated for a
few years I found out that it was
usual in the case of a life convict who has
earned good marks to have her sentence
brought up for consideration after she has
served fifteen years. A life sentence usu-
ally means twenty years, and three months
is taken off each year as a reward for good
conduct. In February, 1903, I was defi-
nitely informed that my case would follow
the ordinary course. I have been accused
of obtaining my release by " trickery," but
these facts speak for themselves.

The impression has also been given by
the press that great leniency was shown in

211

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

my case, and that through the intervention
of friends the Home Office released me
before the expiration of my sentence. No
exceptional leniency whatever was shown
in my case. It depends upon the prisoner
herself whether she is released at an earlier
period or serves the full term of her sen-
tence. By an unbroken record of good con-
duct I reduced my life sentence, which is
twenty years, to fifteen years ; this expired
on the 25th of July, 1904.

The Dawn of Liberty

As a giant refreshed by sleep, the prison
awakens to life, and the voices of officers,
the clang of doors, the ringing of bells
echo throughout the halls. What does it
portend ? Is it the arrival of some distin-
guished visitor from the Home Office?
Then I hear the sound of approaching foot-
steps, as they come nearer and nearer and
then stop at my cell door. The governor
ushers in three gentlemen — one tall and

212

THE DAWN OF LIBERTY

dark and handsome, but with a stern face ;
another short, with a white beard and blue
eyes which looked at me somewhat coldly ;
of the third I have no distinct recollection.
The tall gentleman conversed pleasantly
for several minutes about my work and
myself, then passed out on his tour of in-
spection. I did not know at the time who
these visitors were, but learned later that
the gentleman who spoke to me was the
Secretary of State, Sir Matthew White-
Ridley; one of his companions was Sir
Kenelm Digby, and the other Sir Evelyn
Ruggles-Brise, the chairman of the Prison
Committee, who takes a really humane in-
terest in the welfare of the convicts.

One morning, a week later, I was sum-
moned to appear before the governor. It
is an ordeal to be dreaded by any one who
has broken the rules, but I knew I had not,
and therefore concluded that I was wanted
in connection with my work. When I en-
tered the office he looked up with a kindly
smile, which was also reflected in the face

213

^ I

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

of the chief matron. My attention was ar-
rested. I stood silently waiting for him to
speak. After searching among some pa-
pers on the table, he picked up one . and
read something to the following eflFect:
"The prisoner, P 29, Florence E. May-
brick, is to be informed that the Secretary
of State has decided to grant her discharge
from prison when she has completed fifteen
years of her sentence, conditional upon her
conduct."

For a moment I failed to grasp the full
meaning of these words, but when I did —
how shall I describe the mingled feelings
of joy and thankfulness, of relief and hope,
with which I was overwhelmed! I re-
turned to my cell dazed by the unexpected
message for which for so many long, weary
years I had hoped and prayed.

How anxiously I waited for those last
few months to pass I

214

THE RELEASE

The Release

It was Christmas Eve of IQOS^ I had
helped to decorate the chapel with ever-
greens, which is the only way in which the
greatest festival of the church's year is kept
in prison. There is no rejoicing allowed
prisoners; no festival meal of roast beef
and plum pudding, only the usual prison
diet; and the sad memories of happier
days are emphasized by our bare cells with
their maximum of cleanliness and mini-
mum of comfort. But to me it was the
last Christmas in that "house of sorrow,"
and my heart felt the dawning of a brighter
day. Only four weeks more and I would
have passed out of its grim gates forever I
How I counted those days, and yet how I
shrank from going once more into the
world that had been so cruel, so hostile, so
unmerciful, in spite of the fact that there
was no proof that I was the guilty woman
they assumed me to be I But kind friends

215

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

and loving hearts were waiting to greet me,
to give me refuge and comfort. *"

On Saturday, the 23d of January, my
mother visited me at Aylesbury Prison for
the last time. How many weary and sad
hours we had passed in that visiting-room !
Our hearts were too full for much conver-
sation, and it was with broken voices that
we discussed the arrangements made for
my departure on the following Monday.

The last Sunday I spent in prison I felt
like one in a dream. I could not realize
that to-morrow, the glad to-morrow, would
bring with it freedom and life. In the
evening I was sent for to say " Good-by "
to the governor. Besides the chief matron
and the one who was to be my escort to
Truro, no one was aware of the day or
hour of my departure from Aylesbury.
Not a word had been said to the other
prisoners. I should like to have said fare-
well to them, also to the officers whom I
had known for fourteen years (for several
had come with us from Woking Prison);

216

RIGHT HON. A. AKERS DOUGLAS. M.P.,

THE
I NEW YORK
PUBLIC LIBRARY

^5tor, Lenox and TWden^
Foundations.

THE RELEASE

but I thought it best to pass into my new
life as quietly as possible* At my earnest
request the Home Office consented to al-
low my place of destination to be kept a
secret. I felt that I should derive more
benefit from the change of my new environ-
ment and association with others, if my
identity and place of retreat were not
known to the public.

On Monday, the 25th of January, I was
awakened early, and after laying aside, for
the last time, the garments of shame and
disgrace, I was clothed once more in those
that represent civilization and respectabil-
ity. I descended to the court below, and,
accompanied by the chief matron and my
escort, passed silently through the great
gates and out of the prison. At half-past
six a cab drove quietly up, and the matron
and I silently stepped in and were driven
away to the Aylesbury Station. On our
arrival in London we proceeded at once to
Paddington Station. The noise and the
crowds of people everywhere bewildered me.

217

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

In Retreat at Truro

After an uneventful journey we arrived
at Truro at six p.m., and drove at once to
the Home of the Community of the Epiph-
any, where I stayed during the remainder
of my term of six months. I am told that
some comment has been made on the fact
that the Home was a religious retreat, and
that I ought to have been sent to a secular
one instead. I went there entirely of my
own desire. On our arrival there I bade a
last farewell to my kind companion — one
of the sweetest women it has been my priv-
ilege to meet. The Mother Superior, who
had visited me three months previously at
Aylesbury Prison, received me tenderly,
and at once conducted me to my room.
How pure and chaste everything looked
after the cold, bare walls of my prison cell !
How the restful quiet soothed my jarred
and weakened nerves, and, above all, what
comforting balm the dear Mother Superior

218

IN RETREAT AT TRURO

and the sweet sisters poured into the
wounds of my riven soul !

I look back upon the six months spent
within those sacred walls as the most
peaceful and the happiest — in the true
sense — of my life. The life there is so
calm, so holy, and yet so cheerful, that one
becomes infected, so that the sad thoughts
flee away, the drooping hands are once
more uplifted, and the heart strengthened
to perform the work that a loving God
may have ordained.

I passed several hours of each day
working in the sewing-room with the
sisters. During my leisure time I read
much, and when the weather was fine
delighted in taking long walks within
the lovely grounds that surround the
Home. I did not go out in the country,
nor attend the services on Sunday at the
Cathedral.

I left Truro on the 20th of July a free
woman — with a ticket-of-leave, it is true,
but as I am exempt from police supervision

219

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

even in England, I have no need to con-
sider it in America or elsewhere.

By the courtesy of the American Am-
bassador, the Hon. Joseph H. Choate, I
was provided with an escort to accompany
me and my companion on our journey from
Truro to Rouen, France.

The Hon.* John Hay, Secretary of State,
Washington; the Hon. Joseph H. Choate,
Mr. Henry White, Charge d'Affaires, and
Mr. Carter, Secretary of Embassy, at Lon-
don, have always been most earnest in my
cause. I deeply appreciate their untiring
efforts in my behalf.

I Come to America

After staying with my mother for three
weeks, on the advice of my trounselors,
Messrs. Hayden & Yarrell, of Washing-
ton, District of Columbia, I decided to re-
turn to America with Mr. Samuel V. Hay-
den and his charming wife. I longed to be
once more with my own people, and it was

220

I COME TO AMERICA

only physical weakness and nervous pros-
tration that prevented me from doing so
immediately upon my release. I met these
good friends at Antwerp, Belgium, and
sailed from there on the Red Star Line
steamship Vaderland for New York. My
name was entered on the passenger list as
Rose Ingraham, that I might secure more
quiet and privacy ; but when we were a few
days out the fact of my identity became
known, and with few exceptions the great-
est courtesy, consideration, and delicacy
were shown in the demeanor of the passen-
gers toward me. If any of these should
read these lines I would herewith express
to them my grateful thanks and apprecia-
tion ; while toward the captain and officers
of the Vaderland I feel especially indebted
for their unwearied courtesy and consider-
ation.

When I first caught sight of the Statue
of Liberty, I, perhaps more than any one
on board, realized the full meaning of what
it typifies, and I felt my heart stirred to

221

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

its depths at the memory of what all my
countrymen and countrywomen had done
for me during the dark days of my past, to
prove that they still carried me in their
hearts, though the great ocean rolled be-
tween, and that I had not been robbed of
the high privilege of being an American
citizen.

We arrived at New York on the 23d of
August. It was a " red-letter " day. Once
more, after many years of suffering and
when I had long despaired of ever seeing
the beloved faces of my friends again, my
feet once again pressed the sacred soil of
my native land.

My Lost Years

A time will come when the world will
acknowledge that the verdict which was
passed upon me is absolutely untenable.
But what then ? Who shall give back the
years I have spent within prison walls ; the

222

MY LOST YEARS

friends by whom I am forgotten ; the chil-
dren to whom I am dead ; * the sunshine ;
the winds of heaven ; my woman's life, and
all I have lost by this terrible injustice?

♦The innocents — my children— one a baby of three
years, the other a boy of seven, I had left behind in the
world. They had been taught to believe that their
mother was guilty, and, like their father, was to them
dead. They have grown up to years of imderstanding
under another name. I know nothing about them.
When the pathos of all this touches the reader's heart he
will realize the tragedy of my case.

During the early years of my imprisonment I received
my children's photographs once a year; also several
friendly letters from Mr. Thomas Maybrick, with in-
formation about them. But as time passed on, these
ceased altogether. When I could endure the silence no
longer I instructed Mr. R. S. Cleaver, of Liverpool — who
had been the solicitor in my case, and to whose unwaver-
ing faith and kindness I owe a debt I can never hope to
repay — to write to Mr. Michael Maybrick to forward
fresh photographs of my boy and girl. To this request
Mr. Thomas Maybrick replied that Mr. Michael May-
brick refused to permit it. When the matter was further
urged Mr. Michael Maybrick himself wrote to the gov-
ernor to inform me that my son, who had been made ac-
quainted with the history of the case, did not wish either
his own or his sister's photograph to be sent to me.

223

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN STORY

Time may heal the deepest wounds when
the balm of love and sympathy is poured
into them. It is well; for if mental
wounds proved as fatal as those of the
body, the prison death-roll would indeed
be a long one.

224

PART TWO

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

Introduction

Petitions for a Reprieve

THE jury's verdict of guilty was ren-
dered on August 7, 1889. The evi-
dence at the trial, as well as the learned
judge's "summing up," was reported al-
most verbatim in the English press. The
result was that, not only in Liverpool, but
in almost every city, town, and village of
the United Kingdom, men and women of
every class and grade of society arrived at
the conclusion that the verdict was errone-
ous — as not founded upon evidence, but
upon the biased and misleading summing
up of the case by the mentally incompetent
IS 225

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

judge. Within a few days my lawyers,
the Messrs. Cleaver, of Liverpool, who had
notified the press that they would supply
forms of petition, were inundated with ap-
plications. For the first two days they is-
sued one thousand a day, and I have been
informed that no less than five thousand
petitions for a reprieve, representing near-
ly half a million signatures, were sent to
the Home Secretary within the following
ten days. In response to these, the Home
Office issued to the press the following de-
cision :

" After the fullest consideration, and af-
ter taking the best medical and legal advice
that could be obtained, the Home Secre-
tary advised Her Majesty to respite the
capital punishment of Florence Elizabeth
Maybrick and to commute the punishment
to penal servitude for life; inasmuch as,
although the evidence leads to the conclu-
sion that the prisoner administered and at-
tempted to administer arsenic to her hus-
band with intent to murder him, yet it does

226

POSITION OF HOME SECRETARY

not wholly exclude a reasonable doubt
whether his death was in /act caused by the
administration of arsenic 1'

Illogical Position of Home Secretary

Thus it will be seen that the Home Sec-
retary, Mr. Matthews, ignored the impor-
tant statement of the judge at the trial,
when, in giving emphasis to his remarks,
he told the jury that: " It is essential to this
charge that the man died of arsenic. This
question must be the foundation of a judg-
ment unfavorable to the prisoner, that he
died of arsenic." Then Mr. Matthews, on
reviewing the evidence given at the trial,
finding it impossible to justify the verdict,
because the evidence "does not wholly
exclude a reasonable doubt whether his
[James Maybrick's] death was in fact
caused by the administration of arsenic,"
which question was to be the foundation
of a judgment unfavorable to me, instead
of giving his prisoner the benefit of the rea-

227

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

sonable doubt, took it upon himself to apply
the spirit of the law and of the constitution,
by making use of a wrongful conviction
for one offense charged in order to pun-
ish me for a different offense for which I
had never been tried, but with which he,
without any public trial, charged me, \iz.y
"administering and attempting to admin-
ister arsenic" to my husband.

New Evidence of Innocence Ignored

These charges, made by Mr. Matthews
in 1889, have never been defined ; nor has
any statement been submitted to me or my
legal advisers of the evidence relied on to
prove them ; nor have I been afforded an
opportunity of being heard by counsel in
answer to them, nor of pleading anything
in reply to them. Had a second trial been
granted me, I should have seen the evi-
dence upon which the new charges were
made against me, and in open court I could
have confronted the witnesses. But Mr.

228

EVIDENCE OF INNOCENCE IGNORED

Matthews sentenced me to penal servitude
for life (without giving me a chance to de-
fend myself against the charges) which in-
volved nine months' solitary confinement
in my case — in itself a most excessive pun-
ishment for the untried and, consequently,
unproven charges. He sent me to suffer
fourteen and one-half years on suspicion —
a suspicion not warranted by any evidence
given at the trial. The new evidence, which
has been obtained since my conviction, is
admitted by all fair-minded persons to be
of such a nature that it would satisfy any
intelligent jury that I was not only wrong-
fully found guilty of murder, but was most
wrongfully treated by Mr. Matthews. It
completely exonerates me from the charge
of murder as well as "administering and
attempting to administer arsenic." Since
this evidence was published, no one has
attempted to justify the conviction or the
sentence passed upon me.

Had the jury, instead of finding a ver-
dict of " guilty " of murder, returned a ver-

229

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

diet in the same terms as the finding of
Mr. Matthews, the judge must have en-
tered it as "not guilty" and discharged
me.

Lord Russell's Letter

Well might the Lord Chief Justice Rus-
sell of Killowen write me, as he did on
the 27th of June, 1895, telling me that he
had never relaxed his efforts to urge my
release, and saying:

Royal Court, 27th June, 189s.
Mrs. Maybrick,

Dear Madam: I have been absent on
circuit ; hence my delay in answering your
letter.

I beg to assure you that I have never re-
laxed my efforts where any suitable oppor-
tunity offered to urge that your release
ought to be granted. I feel as strongly as
I have felt from the first that you ought
never to have been convicted, and this opin-
ion I have very clearly expressed to Mr. As-
quith, but I am sorry to say hitherto with-
out effect.

230

EFFORTS FOR RELEASE

Rest assured that I shall renew my rep-
resentations to the incoming Home Secre-
tary, whoever he may be, as soon as the
Government is formed and the Home Sec-
retary is in a position to deal with such
matters.

I am,

Faithfully,

Russell of Killowen.

This also seems to be the opinion of the
leading counsel for the prosecution, Mr.
Addison, Q.C., M.P. (now Judge Addison,
of the Southwark County Courts), who is
reported to have said, after the summing
up, that "the jury could not, especially
in view of the medical evidence, find a ver-
dict of guilty." This statement will be
found in Sir Charles Russell's protest to
Mr. Matthews.

Efforts for Release

The public are not probably fully aware
how much intensity of feeling and earnest
work has been expended on my case dur-

231

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

ing the fourteen and one-half years of my
imprisonment. The Home Office knows.
Men in high positions in both political par-
ties in England have often united in de-
manding a new trial. The almost invaria-
ble reply has been that the best means to
effect my release was to obtain new facts
or evidence, and submit these to the Home
Secretary for his consideration. Those
well-meaning advisers seemed to forget
that the half million of petitioners for my
reprieve or free pardon in England — not to
count those in America — were not moved
thereto by new facts or evidence, but by
the absence of facts or evidence sufficient
to prove that the alleged crime had been
committed by any one, or that either guilt
or complicity in that crime, if crime it
were, attached to me. Surely it is not the
business of the public nor of individual cit-
izens to prove the innocence of any un-
happy person whom process of law selects
for punishment, while it is the business of
every citizen to see that the courts incour

232

EVEN NEW EVIDENCE SUPERFLUOUS

testably prove the guilt of any person ac-
cused of a crime before sentence is passed,
in the following manner :

1. It must be' proved that a crime has
been committed.

2. It must be proved beyond a reasona-
ble doubt that the accused person is the
one who committed it.

Even New Evidence Superfluous

Neither condition has yet been fulfilled
in my case. The evidence on which a half
million petitioners said and say I was un-
justly condemned is sufficient in itself.
While it is true if a new trial had been
granted me I could have produced new
evidence that overwhelmingly demon-
strated my innocence, it is also true that
more facts or new evidence were not req-
uisite to enable justice to be done.

233

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

The Doctors' Doubt

The doctors who gave evidence in favor
of death by arsenical poisoning all stated
that they would not have felt certain on
the subject if the one-tenth of a grain of
arsenic had not been found in the body.
Therefore, since the presence of that ar-
senic could be otherwise accounted for, I
was entitled to an acquittal even on the
evidence of the Crown medical witnesses.
Moreover, the symptom on which two or
three doctors for the prosecution laid most
stress — continuous vomiting — was referred
by the third to morphia administered by
himself. All three were examined before
any evidence of Mr. Maybrick's habit of
arsenic taking was given. Had they be-
lieved him to be an arsenic eater, they
might have arrived at a difiEerent conclu-
sion. The doctors for the defense, who
declared that Mr. Maybrick's symptoms
were not those of arsenical poisoning, were
men of far more experience as regards poi-

234

THE DOCTORS' DOUBT

sons than the Crown medical witnesses.
The quantity of arsenic found in the body
was, in their opinion, quite consistent with
administration in medicinal doses, and
might have been introduced a considerable
time before.

The proved administration of poison
with intent to kill is punishable by penal
servitude, but not necessarily for life —
sometimes for only three years; but the
charge must be proved in open court to be
a felonious attempt by some means actually
used to effectuate the intent, and it remains
with the prosecution to produce the neces-
sary evidence that the means used were
sufficient for the accomplishment of the
e£fect.

The medical evidence proved that the
quantity of arsenic — one-tenth of a grain —
found in Mr. Maybrick's body was not
sufficient to have produced death.

23$

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

Public Surprise at Verdict

The Times of August 8, 1889, declared
that, of the hundreds of thousands of per-
sons who followed the case with eager in-
terest and attention, not one in three was
prepared for the verdict. The large ma-
jority had believed that, in the presence
of such contradictory evidence, the jury
would give the prisoner the benefit of the
doubt and bring in a verdict as much like
the Scotch " not proven " as is permitted
by English law.

Character of Jury

There was strong prejudice against me,
due to the numerous false and sensational
reports circulated by the press during the
interval between the arrest and the trial.
The jury belonged to a class of men who
were not competent to weigh technical
evidence,* and no doubt attached great

*The jury was composed of three plumbers, two farm-
ers, one milliner, one wood-turner, one provision dealer,
one grocer, one ironmonger, one house-painter, and ooe
baker.

236

THE "MAD JUDGE

weight to the opinions of the local physi-
cians, one of whom was somewhat of a
celebrity. But the main element in the
conviction was Justice Stephen, whose
mind, undoubtedly owing to incipient in-
sanity (he died insane a year later), was
incapable of dealing with so intricate a
case.

The "Mad Judge"

The Liverpool Daily Post, as I am told,
had been hostile rather than favorable
toward me, but, on the death of Lord
Chief Justice Russell, that journal, in arti-
cles of August 13 and 14, 1900, showed that
it fully appreciated the unfairness of my
trial, for it stated that no human being
ought to be handed over to be tried by a
"mad judge." The following is taken
from The Post of August 13, 1900:

"The death of the Lord Chief Justice
may have recalled to the minds of some
Liverpool folk a sad and sordid tragedy

237

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASK

enacted among them eleven years ago, in
which he was a principal performer. To
those who were there, a vivid recollection
still persists of that bright July morning
when a thronged court, hushed in expec-
tancy, awaited the beginning of the May-
brick trial. In fancy one still hears the
distant fanfare of the trumpets as the
judges with quaint pageantry passed down
the hall, and still with the mind's eye sees
the stately crimson-clad figure of the great
mad judge as he sat down to try his last
case. A tragedy, indeed, was played upon
the bench no less than in the dock.

" Few who looked upon the strong,
square head can have suspected that the
light of reason was burning very low with-
in ; yet as the days of the trial dragged by
— days that must have been as terrible to
the judge as to the prisoner — men began
to nod at him, to wonder, and to whisper.
Nothing more painful was ever seen in
court than the proud old man's desperate
struggle to control his failing faculties.
But the struggle was unavailing. It was
clear that the growing volume of facts was

unassorted, undigested in his mind ; that

238

JUSTICE STEPHEN'S BIASED CHARGE

his judgment swayed backward and for-
ward in the conflict of testimony; that his
memory failed to grip the most sahent
features of the case for many minutes to-
gether. It was shocking to think that a
human life depended upon the direction of
this wreck of what was once a great judge."

Justice Stephen's Biased Charge

The charge of Mr. Justice Stephen to
the jury positively teemed with misstate-
ments as to the evidence given during the
trial. I quote a statement from the same
journal in its issue of August 17, 1900:

" I should be very sorry to think that the
same number of errors as to the matters of
fact given in the evidence had ever been
made in any judge's charge. It simply
swarms with them, and as the jury at the end
of a long trial is likely to prefer the judge's
resum^ to their own recollection, I doubt
if the verdict in the Maybrick case was
founded on the evidence at all. And if I
am right in thinking that the jurors found-
ed their verdict on the judge's recapitula-

339

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

tion of the evidence rather than on the evi-
dence itself, I do not see how any counsel
could have saved the prisoner."

That the jury " did not hear the whole
of the evidence very distinctly " is admit-
ted by one of them in the Liverpool Daily
Post of August 10, 1889. Consequently
they were likely to be unduly influenced
by the judge's charge. There is no evi-
dence that the jury detected the judge's
misstatements, as a more intelligent jury
certainly would have done. Their minds
were " taken captive " by the charge of Jus-
tice Stephen, and they were as " clay in the
hands of the potter."

Lord Russell's Memorandum Quashed

The Lord Chief Justice sent the Home
Secretary a memorandum consisting of
twenty folios, in which he stated the strong
opinion that " Mrs. Maybrick ought to be
released at once." The Lord Chief Justice
also requested that the contents of his

240

PROTESTS OF LORD RUSSELL

memorandum be made public. Yet when
asked in the House of Commons to lay the
document on the table of the House in
order that it might be accessible to the
members, the Home Secretary emphatic-
ally declined. The London Daily Mail^
in a leader on this incident, said :

" The only conceivable reasons for decli-
ning to give publicity to the letter, which
was actually intended for publication, are
apparently official red tape and the fear of
giving new life to the agitation in favor of
Mrs. Maybrick's release. This result will
be almost as effectually achieved by sur-
rounding the case with further mystery and
leaving upon the public mind the grave
suspicion that justice may not have been
done."

Repeated Protests of Lord Russell

The following extracts are taken from
the " Life of Lord Russell of Killowen " by
R. Barry O'Brien.

" In November, 1895, he [Lord Russell]
16 241

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

wrote to Sir Matthew White-Ridley (page
260),^ conveying his strong and emphatic
opinion that Florence Maybrick ought
never to have been convicted; that her
continued imprisonment is an injustice
which ought promptly to be ended, and
added : ' I have never wavered in this opin-
ion. After her conviction I wrote and had
printed a memorandum, which I presume
is preserved at the Home Office. Lest it
should not be, I herewith transmit a copy.'

" As is known, what happened was that
Mr. Matthews, after consultation with the
present Lord Chancellor, Lord Salisbury,
and Mr. Justice Stephen, and after seeing
Dr. Stephenson, the principal Crown wit-
ness, and also the late Dr. Tidy, respited
the capital sentence on the expressed
ground that there was sufficient doubt
whether death had been caused by arsen-
ical poisoning to justify the respite.

"It will be seen (i) that such a doubt ex-
isted as to the commission of the offense
for which Florence Maybrick was tried as
rendered it improper, in the opinion of the
Home Secretary and his advisers, that the

capital sentence should be carried out ; and

242

PROTESTS OF LORD RUSSELL

(2> that for more than six years Florence
A^aybrick has been suffering imprisonment
on the assumption of Mr. Matthews that
she committed an offense for which she was
never tried by the constitutional authority
and of which she has never been adjudged
guilty."

From page 261 : " This is in itself a most
serious state of things. It is manifestly un-
just that Florence Maybrick should suffer
for a crime in regard to which she has never
been called upon to answer before any law-
ful tribunal.

" Is it not obvious that if the attempt to
murder had been the offense for which she
was arraigned, the course of the defense
would have been different ? I speak as her
counsel of what I know. Read the report
of the defense, and you will see that I de-
voted my whole strength to and massed the
evidence upon the point that the prosecu-
tion had misconceived the facts, that the
foundation on which the whole case rested
was rotten, for that, in fact, there was no
murder; that, on the contrary, the de-
ceased had died from natural causes.

'* It is true that incidental reference was

243

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

made to certain alleged acts of Florence
Maybrick, but the references were inci-
dental only ; the stress of my argument be-
ing, in fact, that no murder had been com-
mitted^ because the evidenxe did not warrant
the conclusion that the deceased had died
Jrom. arsenical poisoning On the other
hand, had the Crown counsel suggested the
case of attempt to murder by poison, it
would have been the duty of counsel to ad-
dress himself directly and mainly to the
alleged circumstances which, it was argued,
pointed to guilty intent. That these al-
leged circumstances were capable in part of
being explained, in part of being minimized,
and in part of being attacked as unre-
liably vouched, can not, I think, be doubted
by any one who has with a critical eye
scanned the evidence. I do not deny that
my feelings are engaged in this case. It is
impossible that they should not be, but I
have honestly tried to judge the case, and
I now say that if I was called upon to ad-
vise in m.y character of head of the Crimi-
nal fudicature of this country y I should ad-
vise you that Florence Maybrick ought to be

allowed to go free!'

244

THE AMERICAN OFFICIAL PETITION

From page 262 : " I think it my duty to
renew my protest against the continued
imprisonment of Florence Maybrick. I
consider the history of the case reflects dis-
credit on the administration of the crimi-
nal law. I think my protest ought to be
attended to at last. The prisoner has al-
ready undergone punishment for a period
four times as long, or more, as the mini-
mum punishment fixed by law for the
commission of the crime, of which she
has never been convicted or for which she
has never been tried, but for which she has
been adjudged guilty by your predecessor
in the office of Home Secretary."

The American Official Petition

The following is quoted from the Ameri-
can Official Petition sent to the Rt. Hon.
Henry Matthews, Q.C., M.P., Her Maj-
esty's principal secretary for the Home
Department :

" As Florence Elizabeth Maybrick is an
American woman, without father, brother,

245

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

husband, or kin in England, except two in-
fcint children, enduring penal servitude for
life in Woking Prison ;

" As the conduct of her trial resulted in
a profound impression of a miscarriage of
justice, in an earnest protest against the
verdict, and the execution of the sentence
of death, and its commutation to penal ser-
vitude for life on the ground of reasonable
doubt whether a murder had been com-
mitted ;

" As a careful legal scrutiny of the evi-
dence given at the trial by eminent solici-
tors, barristers, queen's counsel, and mem-
bers of Parliament, and the production of
facts not in evidence at the trial have re-
sulted in a final decision of counsel that
the case is one proper for the grave con-
sideration of a criminal appellate tribunal
— if such a tribunal existed ;

" Therefore, we earnestly ask that the Rt
Hon. Henry Matthews, Q.C., M.P., Her
Majesty's principal secretary of state for
the Home Department, will advise Her
Majesty to order the pardon and release of
the prisoner, who has now suffered an im-
prisonment of three years.

246

THE AMERICAN OFFICIAL PETITION

** Levi P. Morton, Vice-President of the
United States, President of the Sen-
ate.

Charles T. Crisp, Speaker of the House
of Representatives.

Charles Foster, Secretary of the Treas-
ury.

James G. Blaine, Secretary of State.

S. B. Elkins, Secretary of War.

W. H. Miller, Attorney-General.

John Wanamaker, Postmaster-General.

B. T. Tracy, Secretary of the Navy.

John B. Noble, Secretary of the Inte-
rior.

G. M. Rusk, Secretary of Agriculture.

J., Cardinal Gibbons.

J. M. ScoFiELD, Major - General Com-
manding the Army.

A. W. Truly, Brigadier-General-in-Chief,
Signal Office.

Thomas Lincoln Casey, Brigadier-Gen-
eral-in-Chief of Engineers.

Joseph Cabell Breckenridge, Brigadier-
General, Infantry-General.

J. O. Kelton, Brigadier-General, Adju-
tant-General.

William Smith, Paymaster-General.

247

ti
i€
t€
ti
tt
tt

M
«
«(

€*

t€

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

" H. M. Batchelder, General - Quarter-
master-General.

" B. Du Barry, General and Commanding
General Infantry.

"O. Sutherland, General Infantry Gen-
eral.

" D. W. Flagler, Chief of Ordnance.

"J.Norman Lisber, Acting Judge-Advo-
cate-General.

" Thomas Ewing, Brevet-Major-General,
U. S. A., and many others."

Secretary Blaine's Letter to Minister

Lincoln

I will conclude by quoting the letter of
Secretary Blaine to Mr. Robert Lincoln,
then Minister to the Court of St. James. It
will be seen that Mr. Blaine was of opinion
that I had lost my citizenship. Since this
letter was written it has been decided by
the Supreme Court of the United States
that a woman married to a foreigner, on
the death of her husband can, on applica-
tion, be reinstated to citizenship,

943

THE

NEW YORK

PUBLIC LIBRARY

Astor, Lenox and TMden
Foundations,

BLAINFS LETTER

" Department of State, Washington,

" March 7, 1893-
" My DEAR Mr. Lincoln : As Mrs. May-
brick lost her American citizenship by her
English marriage, and as I fear she does
not resume it by her widowhood, I can not
instruct you officially as to the course you
should pursue toward her.

*' But her American and Southern birth,
her connection with many families of the
highest respectability and even of promi-
nence in the country's service, have attract-
ed much attention to her fate,

** I have no other interest in her than an
interest which you and I share in common
with all our countrymen — the desire to help
an American woman in distress. That she
may have been influenced by the foolish
ambition of too many American girls for a
foreign marriage, and have descended from
her own rank to that of her husband's fam-
ily, which seems to have been somewhat
vulgar, must be forgiven to her youth,
since she was only eighteen at the time of
her marriage,
** There is a wide and widening belief in

this country that she is legally innocent

249

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

and iUegally imprisoned. The official
charge of the judge that murder must be
proved and the official announcement of
the Home Secretary that the evidence
leaves a ' reasonable doubt ' of murder are
the premises of but one conclusion — the
discharge of the prisoner.

" The fact that she was never indicted or
tried by a jury of her peers on a specific
count of felonious attempt to administer
arsenic, yet is condemned to penal servi-
tude for life on the Home Secretary's
statement that she evidently made such an
attempt, can never be reconciled to the
English principle that an accused person
shall be tried by a jury of his peers. Law-
yers here are among the strongest believers
in the illegality of her imprisonment. In-
deed, the sense of injustice is developing
and deepening into horror.^

" Officially I could only instruct you on

behalf of a multitude of American citizens

to investigate her case. Personally I beg

to express to you my deep interest in it,

and pray you, if possible, to communicate

with Messrs. Lumley and Sir Charles

Russell as to any method of American co-

250

BLAINE'S LETTER

operation which may seem to them desir-
able.

" Messrs. Limiley have made a very able
brief, which I am sure would interest you,
and which seems to me unanswerable. Sir
Charles Russell, whose reputation you
know, is her counsel. Consult with them
what best can be done, from an American
point of view, to secure Mrs. Maybrick's
release. And if you shall have read Lum-
ley's brief, I am sure that conviction will
lead you to personal activity in her behalf.

" You can communicate with me in strict

confidence, as from one American citizen

to another, for the relief of an American

woman helplessly enduring a great wrong.

" Believe me, etc.,

" James G. Blaine."

And yet it required the time from
March 7, 1892, until July 20, 1904, to attain
my liberation; and then it was accom-
plished by time limit and by no act of grace
or concession on the part of the English
Government.

351

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

Henry W. Lucy on Lord Russell

The Strand Magazine^ London, in its
November number, 1900, published an arti-
cle by Henry W. Lucy, Esq., who, speak-
ing of the late Lord Chief Justice Russell,
says:

"The most remarkable episode in
Charles Russell's career at the bar un-
doubtedly was his defense of Mrs. May-
brick.

" I happened to find myself in the same
hotel with him at Liverpool on the morn-
ing of the day set down for the opening of
the trial. At breakfast he spoke in confi-
dent terms of his client's innocence and of
the surety of her acquittal. He did not
take into account the passing mood of the
judge who tried the case, and so found
himself out of his reckoning ; but the ver-
dict of the jury, still less the summing-up
of Fitz-James Stephen, did not shake his
conviction. Sir Charles Russell was of all
men least likely to be misled by appear-
ances or deliberate deception; having

252

HENRY W. LUCY ON LORD RUSSELL

probed the case to the bottom, having
turned his piercing eyes on the woman in
the dock, having talked to her in private
and studied her in public, he was con-
vinced of her innocence.

" Lord Landoff was a lawyer of high po-
sition at the English bar when, as Mr.
Henry Matthews, he came into the Home
Office.

" The verdict of the jury was * guilty,'
and her sentence was death, which was a
real surprise, as was afterward learned, even
to the judge. Sir Fitz-James Stephen. If
Mr. Matthews believed her guilty, he
should not have commuted her sentence
upon the ground that he assigned. If she
was guilty she well deserved death on the
scaffold. The evidence, however, satisfied
Mr. Matthews that there was reasonable
doubt that the death of Mr. Maybrick was
due to arsenic. In this view, as is well
known, he was sustained by Justice Ste-
phen. If such a doubt really came into
Mr. Matthews's mind, as was made the
ground of the commutation of the sentence,
under English law that doubt entitled the
accused to acquittal.

253

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

" Why he lacked the courage of his con-
victions can only be surmised. At all
events he did not dare to take the respon-
sibility of allowing her to be executed.

" The intercession of the American Gov-
ernment through Mr. Blaine, Secretary of
State, was urgent, strong, and most in-
tense. It is incredible that Mr. Matthews
desired any loophole to release her. The
case was full of them.

"Sir Matthew White-Ridley was not a
lawyer, and there is no probability that he
ever read the evidence in the case, which
was voluminous. He could not have read
the papers in three days if he had attempt-
ed it. He simply followed his predeces-
sor's line and was not able to take up the
case on its merits."

Lord Russell's Conviction of Mrs.
Maybrick's Innocence

This statement of Mr. Lucy is of great
value as an answer to the assault made on
Lord Russell's memory after his death, on
his firm belief in my innocence.

254

LORD RUSSELL'S ATTITUDE
Lord Hugh Cecil wrote to a constituent:

" I believe I am right in stating that he
(Lord Russell) never said that he believed
Mrs. Maybrick to be innocent."

When this was shown Lord Russell by
Mr. A. W. McDougall, Esq., the Chief
Justice exclaimed :

" Does Lord Hugh Cecil suppose that I
would abandon all the traditions of the Bar
and put forward publicly as an argument
in such a case my personal belief in this,
that, or the other thing ? Does he suppose
that I would have made all the eflForts I
have been making to obtain her freedom if
I believed her to be guilty ?"

Explanation of Attitude of Home

Secretaries

" Personal Rights," of November 15, in
commenting on the statement of Mr. Lucy
in The Strand Magazine^ says :

255

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

"We do not share the belief that Sir
Fitz- James Stephen was insane in any plen-
ary sense at the time of the trial ; but we
are convinced that he was not fully sane.
His charge to the jury, the report of which
is reproduced in full in Mr. Levy's book, is
grotesquely inaccurate; and if the jury
took it to be a compendium of the evidence
— as they probably did — the result of their
deliberation is fully accounted for. I ndeed,
if the facts were such as the judge stated,
the verdict could hardly be impugned.
How different they were may be seen by
any one who compares the evidence with
the judge's charge, in the book already re*
f erred to. To take a single instance : the
judge stated that, according to the evidence
of Alice Yapp, at the commencement of
Mr. Maybrick's illness, he was very sick
and in great pain immediately after some
medicine was given to him by his wife.
Alice Yapp swore nothing of the kind.
She saw neither any administration of
medicine nor any sickness. We could
give other instances of gross inaccu-
racy, generally leading to the conclusion

of the prisoner's guilt; but, for our

256

HON. KOilERT 1

ATTITUDE OF HOME SECRETARIES

present purpose, the above incident will
suffice.

" If this was the character of the judge'^s
charge to the Jury, what confidence can be
placed in his notes ? Still upon those notes
was probably based the conclusions of suc-
€€s^ve Home Secretaries or of the officials
employed by them. When Mr. Lucy
holds up his hands in astonishment at the
marvelous consensus of opinion of various
Hcwne Secretaries^ he seems to us to mani-
fest remarkable blindness — for one so Jong
behind the Speaker s chair^as to the vica-
rious nature of that opinion. It is more
than possible that the conclusions of Mr.
Matthews, Mr. Asquith, and Sir Matthew
White-Ridley were all drawn for them by
the same gentleman, or, at least, that the
same gentleman helped these various
Home Secretaries to come to the same
conclusion.

"We hope that Mr. Ritchie, the new
Home Secretary, will judge this matter for
himself. Let him read the salient portions,
at leatet, oi Mr. Levy's book, and„ per con-
tra, the article of X. Y. Z. in The Contem-
porary Review of September last. If he
17 257

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

likes to make the inquiry, he will find that
X. Y. Z. is one of his new permanent staflF.
and that the doctrines put forward in the
article are the embodiment of Home Office
practise. This is a matter which does not
concern the Maybrick case alone. Scarce-
ly a month passes without some new mani-
festation of injustice brought about by ad-
herence to the traditions of the department
over which Mr. Ritchie now presides. If
he will seek out this hydra and slay it, he
will leave for himself an immortal name
among Secretaries of State, and — what he
will hold of more importance — ^he will cut
ofiF a permanent source of injustice, give
releasement and joy to the innocent pining
in prison, and breathe a new life into a de-
partment which is sadly in need of a reno-
vating spirit."

Upholding the Justiciary

In the same number of this journal is an
article from " Lex," a well-known writer in
English journals, which we reproduce :

"Sir: May I call attention to the two

258

UPHOLDING THE JUSTICIARY

articles in the Liverpool Post of August 13
and 14, in which the utter incompetence of
the judge at the Maybrick trial is strongly
asserted? The writer is distinctly hostile
to the prisoner, and writes without any in-
tention of raising the question whether the
trial was not null and void; but as the
English system consists of trial by judge
and jury, the total incompetence of either
element should clearly vitiate it. More-
over, Mr. Ruggles-Brise, on the occasion
of a visit to America in 1897, stated that
the reason of the steadfast refusal of the
Home Secretary to release the prisoner was
his desire to uphold the wholesome authority
of the English justiciary . That authority
can not be regarded as wholesome if the
judge was insane. Lord Russell, who was
present throughout the trial, was of differ-
ent opinion from that of the judge. He
was undoubtedly sane. If Sir J. F. Ste-
phen was insane, the public will, I think,
be of opinion that the sane judge should
have had the most influence with the exec-
utive."

359

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

Need of Court of Criminal Appeal

Lord Esher, in The Times of August 17,
1889, strongly advocated a court of crimi-
nal appeal, and The Times^ in an article of
the same date, supported the views ex-
pressed by Lord Esher and by Lord Fitz-
gerald, as follows :

"A court of appeal, as Lord Esher
sketches it, would not be open to the ob-
jections which can be fairly urged against
our present informal method of proced-
ure. The Home Secretary, as a quasi court
of appeal, is, as Lord Fitzgerald remarks,
not a judge and has not the power of a
judge. . . . The judgment pronounced by
a strong court of criminal appeal, such as
Lord Esher's letter suggests, would do
more to satisfy the public mind than the
best efforts of the Home Secretary could
possibly do. The reform which Lord Esh-
er advocates has been long called for, and
Lord Fitzgerald did well to press it on the
Government. . . . What the public feel is
that they would rather have the fallibility

260

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

of trained judges than the fallibility of an
individual sitting without any of the ap-
paratus with which a court of law is enabled
to detect truth from falsehood, and perhaps
unconsciously confusing the prerogative
of mercy with justice."

261

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

THE BRIEF OF MESSRS. LUMLEY

& LUMLEY

'T^HIS brief of Messrs. Lumley & Lum-
* ley, characterized in the preceding
letter of Secretary Blaine as "very able"
and "unanswerable," is too long for re-
production in these pages in its entirety,
and hence only the main points are given.
The document was prepared at the in-
stance of Lord Russell of Killowen for
submission to himself and three other
Queen's Counsel, with a view of obtain-
ing a new trial. It may interest the
reader to know that the money required
to make this searching analysis by Messrs.
Lumley & Lumley was raised by a popu-
lar subscription in America, through the
good offices of the New York World.
The eminent Queen's counsel, after a full
consideration of the analysis of the case,
submitted the following opinion :

262

OPINION— RE F. E. MAYBRICK

Opinion — Re F. E. Maybrick

" Having carefully considered the facts
stated in the elaborate case submitted to
us by Messrs. Lumley & Lumley, and
the law applicable to the matter, we are
clearly of opinion that there is no mode by
which in this case a new trial or a ' venire
de novo ' can be obtained, nor can the pris-
oner be brought up on a ' habeas corpus,'
with the view to retrying the issue of her
innocence or guilt.

" We say this notwithstanding the case
of Regina vs. Scarfe (17 Q. B., 238, 5 ; Cox,
C. C, 243; 2 Den., C. C, 281).

"We are of opinion that in English
criminal procedure there is no possibility
of procuring a rehearing in the case of fel-
ony where a verdict has been found by a
properly constituted jury upon an indict-
ment which is correct in form. This rule
is, in our opinion, absolute, unless circum-
stances have transpired, and have been en-
tered upon the record, which, when there
appearing, would invalidate the tribunal
and reduce the trial to a nullity by reason

263

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

of its not having been before a properly
constituted tribunal. None of the matters
proposed to be proved go to this length.

" We think it right to add tihat then^ are
many matters stated in the case, not merely
with reference to the evidence at and the
incidents of the trial, but suggesting new
facts, which would be umitiers proper /lor
the grave consideration ^f m Cfourt ^f
Criminal Appeal^ if such a tribunal existed
in this country.
(Signed) " Charles Russell^ Q.C.

" I. Fletcher Moulton, Q.C*

Harrv Bookin Poland, Q.C.

Regikald Smith, Q.C*

"Lincoln's Inn, 12th April, 1898*

This opinion was based upon the follow-
ing points, presented by Messrs. Lumley
& Lumley;

Justice Stephen's Misdirections

The misdirections which are selected for
consideration may be conveniently classed,
among others, under these headings :

I. As to the facts disclosed in the evi*

264

JUSTICE STEPHEN'S MISDIRECTIONS

dence of the procuring and possession of
arsenic by Mrs. Maybrick and of her ad-
ministering if.

2% As to the cause of death.
A perusal of the summing-up from be-
ginning to end impresses the mind with
the feeling that, whenever Mn Justice Ste-
phen approached any fact ofiEered by the
defense which threw light upon the posses-
sion and an tUteged administration of ar^^
senic by Mrs. Maybrick^ he drew the minds
of the jury away from it; he played) in
fcw^t, the part (of the peewit, which swoops
and screams in another part of the field on
purpose to hide where its nest is» and to
draw the attention of the passers-by from
the right spot.

Mr. Justice Stephen pointed out to the
jury in his summing-up: " You must begin
the whole subject of poison with this,
which is a remarkable fact in the case and
which it seems to me tells favorably rather
than otherwise for the prisoner^ You
must take notice of it and consider what

265

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

inference you draw from it. In the whole
case, from first to last, there is tio evidence
at all of her having bought any poison, or
definitely having had anything to do with
procuring any, with the exception of fly-
papers. But there is evidence of a consid-
erable quantity having been found in vari-
ous things, which were kept some here and
some there — kept principally, as I gather,
in the inner room.* . . . There is evidence
about a considerable quantity of poison in
this house, and more particularly about
one or two receptacles which were in the
inner room, Mr. Maybrick's dressing-room,
as it has been pointed out."

Misdirection as to Mr. Maybrick's

Symptoms

From the testimony it appears that on
the 27th of April James Maybrick, before
starting to the Wirrall Races, was sick.
There is no actual evidence of vomiting,

* Mr. Maybrick's dressing-room.

266

MR. MAYBRICK'S SYMPTOMS

but he is described as sick, and as feeling
a numbness in his legs while walking down-
stairs, which was an old-standing complaint
of his of many years. Both he himself and
Mrs. Maybrick told the servants that this
was due to a double dose of some London
medicine. He got wet through at the
races and dined in his wet clothes at a
friend's (Mr. Hobson), on the other side of
the Mersey, and did not return home till
after the servants had retired to bed ; but
the next morning, Sunday, the 28th of
April, he was taken ill, and Mrs. Maybrick
sent a servant o£E hurriedly for Dr. Hum-
phreys, who had not attended her husband
before, but who was the doctor living near-
est the house, and in the mean time got
some mustard and water, telling him to
take it, as it would remove the brandy at
all events. Dr. Humphreys attended
James Maybrick on the 28th, but was not
told by him that he had vomited the day
before.

Mr. Justice Stephen, when referring to

267

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

this, said: "The Wirrall Races were fol-
lowed by symptoms which were described
to be arsenical." It is submitted that this
was a misdirection^ the symptom there re-
ferred to being sickness, and there was no
evidence of vomiting on any of the days
immediately succeeding the Wirrall Races.
But on the 28th of April the mustard and
water was given him by Mrs. Maybrick for
the purpose of producing sickness and re-
moving the brandy, and if he had been sick
it would have been attributable to mustard
and water ^ not to arsenic.

On the other hand, the medical evi-
dence showed that gastroenteritis might
have been set up either by improper food
or drink, or an excess of either ; or, again,
by such a wetting through as deceased got
at the Wirrall Races. On the 8th of May
Alice Yapp communicated to Mrs. Briggs
and Mrs. Hughes her suspicions that
James Maybrick's illness was due to Mrs.
Maybrick poisoning him ^\^ fly-papers.

268

ACCESS TO POISONS

Misdirection as to Mrs. Maybrick's
Access to Poisons

The purchase and soaking of fly-papers
is the only direct evidence of the posses-
sion of arsenic in any form by Mrs. May-
brick, but the judge told the jury, and it is
submitted it is a gross misdirection^ that
Mrs. Maybrick " undoubtedly had access to
considerable quantities of arsenic in other
formsl' inasmuch as the only evidence a^ to
such access was that after the death of
James Maybrick these two women, Mrs.
Briggs and Alice Yapp, who exhibited the
most unfriendly feeling toward her, said
they had found in the house certain stores
of arsenic.

It is submitted for the serious considera-
tion of counsel that the circumstances un-
der which these two women produced these
stores of arsenic are so suspicious as to jus-
tify the suggestion that that arsenic was
not there before his death, and that Mrs.
Maybrick never did have any access to it

269

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

or knowledge of it at all. There was no
evidence as to where or by whom this ar-
senic was obtained, nor was there any evi-
dence that the police had made any eflFort
to discover where, when, or by whom that
arsenic was procured.

[Note. — How and when this arsenic may
have been procured by Mr. Maybrick him-
self will appear further on as a part of the
new evidence.]

The places in which arsenic was found
were open and accessible to every one in
the house, and no person gave any evi-
dence that he or she had ever seen it in
the house before these two women found
it after death.

As regards the black powder (arsenic
mixed with charcoal) and the two solutions
of arsenic produced by Mrs. Briggs and
Alice Yapp, Mr. Davies, the analyst, gave
evidence that, when analyzing the contents
of the various bottles, he had searched dili-
gently and microscopically for any traces,
and could find no trace of charcoal having

270

ACCESS TO POISONS

been introduced into any of them. So this
circumstantial evidence may be eliminated.

As regards white arsenic, also produced
by these women, it must be observed that
not only was it not shown that Mrs. May-
brick had purchased any, but it is sub-
mitted that the judge ought to have pointed
out to the jury ^ as the fact is, that it would
have been almost impossible for her or any
woman to have obtained any white arsenic
at all. No shopkeeper dare sell it to any
one except to a medical man, and even
then under the stringent restrictions of the
Sale of Poison Act.

At the trial a wholesale druggist
(Thompson, of Liverpool) gave evidence
that James Maybrick constantly visited his
cousin, who had been in his employment
at his stores, where he could have obtained
white arsenic from him without any diffi-
culty ; and it will be observed that it was
found in his hatbox.

It is a remarkable thing in this connec-
tion that, while Edwin Maybrick called the

271

ANALYSIS OF THE MAVBRICK CASE

pc^e in on Sunday night, and gave them
the bkick solutions and white solutions
which Mrs. Biiggs had found on the Sun-
day morning, he did not gfive them the
black powder which Alice Ya|^ had iound
on the* night before; and, i^ fact, that
Michael Maybrick did not give it to the
police until Tuesday, the i4tK.

It is also a remarkahte fact that, ahhougk
these black solutions and that white scltih
tton of arsenic and that soK^ arsenic wluch
Mrs. Brig^s had found, were not handed by
the police to the anal^^st until several days
afterward, and were therefore naf known ib
be arsenic by awy'body^ yet Mrs. 3riggs was
abh to inform, Mirs. Mayirttk 09t T^iesdny^
ike i'4tk^ as was testified t6y that these bet*
ties contained arsenic.

It is submitted that Mrs. Brigga eouU
not have known that without some other
means of knowledge than k>oking at thenu

The importance of this misdirection d

the judge as to the question of possession

of arsenic by Mrs. Maybrick can iK)t be

272

"TRACES" OF ARSENIC

overstated. It was conclusively shown that
no decoction of fly-papers or of the black
powder was the source of the arsenic with
which certain articles found in the house
and office were said to be infected, because
the analyst said he had searched for the
fibers of the papers and for the charcoal,
and could notjind any traces of either. If
Mrs. Maybrick knew of the pure arsenic,
why should she have bought the fly-papers,
either for a cosmetic purpose or murder,
and what should she have wanted with
" poison for cats ? *'

Misdirection as to " Traces " of Arsenic

Out of the list submitted by the police,
therefore, the only two things which could
have been the source of the arsenic were
the bottle of saturated solution, No. lo in
the Police List, and the bottle of solid ar-
senic. No. 1 1 in the Police List.

It may be observed that if all the arsenic
or " traces " of the same, with which various
i8 273

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

things were said to be infected, were col-
lected together, it would not constitute a
fatal dose, the smallest fatal dose recorded
being two grains, and this in the case of a
woman, and surely not in the case of a per-
son addicted to large doses of arsenic.

At the inquest Mr. Davies defined what
he meant by the word " trace." He said :

" It means something under xrir part of
a grain. It does not mean something
which I could not weigh, but something
which I could 7wt guarantee to be abso-
lutely free from other things ; but anything
under -^ part of a grain I should not con-
sider satisfactory. If I said distinct traces,
I should say it meant something between
TOT and Y^ part of a grain, while a mi-
nute trace is less than xroir part of a grain."

In reference to Reinsch's test which Mr.
Davies used in these experiments, this pas-
sage occurs in Taylor's " Medical Jurispru-
dence," vol. i., p. 268 : " The mere presence
of a gray deposit on pure copper afFords no
absolute proof of the presence of arsenic.

274

TRACES OF ARSENIC

Bismuth, antimony, and mercury all yield
deposits with Reinsch's test. The gray
deposit of bismuth may easily be taken for
arsenic." And again: "The errors into
which the faulty methods of applying
Reinsch's test lead have led its reliability
to be much discredited, and, although in
skilful hands the results are trustworthy, it
would be perhaps unsafe to rely upon it in
an important criminal investigation."

It is submitted that the evidence relating
to the articles which Mr. Davies said were
infected with arsenic only to the extent of
an unweighable trace could not and ought
not to be regarded as proof that any ar-
senic at all was there, or as being anything
more than a suspicion upon this analyst's
mind that what he saw was arsenic, and
that it was a misdirection on the part of
Mr. Justice Stephen to treat a mere ex-
pression of opinion of that kind as proof of
the presence of arsenic.

275

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

Misdirection as to Arsenic in Solution

It will be observed that the only things
of which James Maybrick could have par-
taken [but did not], in which arsenic in a
weighable form was present, were the bot-
tle of Valentine's meat juice and the pot
of glycerin, and that the arsenic found in
them was found in a state of solution.

As regards the half grain of arsenic found
in the meat juice ^ scientific evidence will
be forthcoming that it is a physical impos-
sibility for any person to dissolve half a
grain of solid arsenic in 411 grains of Val-
entine's meat juice, which is all the liquid
that was in the bottle when it was handed
to Mr. Davies.

Mr. Davies, moreover, found that (al-
though he used very loose and unscientific
language in his evidence) the specific grav-
ity of the meat juice was considerably re-
duced, thereby showing that the half grain
of arsenic found in it had been introduced
in the form of arsenic in solutions

276

ARSENIC IN SOLUTION

It will now be observed that the only
arsenic in solution which was available^
among the stores of. arsenic found in the
house, was the bottle No. lo in the police
list, and it is submitted that bottle No. 1 1
(solid arsenic) must, like the black solu-
tions, be eliminated from any store of arsen-
ic which Mrs. Maybrick, whether she had
access to it or not, could have employed for
the purpose of infecting any of the things
found in the house to be infected.

Mr. Davies described the bottle No. lo
as a saturated solution of white arsenic,
and he stated that it had been dissolved
with water, some of the crystals remaining
at the bottom undissolved.

At the inquest he stated, in reply to a
question by the coroner: " The bottle No.
10, which was also in the box, contained a
saturated solution of arsenic and solid ar-
senic at the bottom. There was no label
on it. It contained, solid and liquid, per-
haps two grains — a grain at all events."

*Sl9 it is evident that there was not a fatal

277

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

dose even in the stores which Mrs. May-
brick could have used had she had access to
it.

As regards this bottle, Mr. Justice Ste-
phen told the jury: "A saturated solution
is a solution which has taken up as much
arsenic as it can, the water becoming satu-
rated with arsenic; the remainder of the
arsenic is found at the bottom. In this
case there was a saturated solution of ar-
senic in the water and a small portion of
arsenic at the bottom. With regard to that
these questions arise: What was it for?
Who is wanting such a quantity of strong
solution of arsenic ? Who has put it there
and how is it to be used ? These are the
questions, in the solution of which I can
not help you. There is nothing definite
about it to connect Mr. Maybrick with it
certainly.* If he was in the habit of arsenic
eating he would not keep it saturated in

♦ Later evidence showed that Mr, Maybrick secured as
much as 150 grains from one person, only about two
months before his death.

278

ARSENIC IN SOLUTION

water in quantities he could not possibly
use.

Mr. Davies found that this bottle " con-
tained in solid and liquid perhaps two
grains — a grain at all events." Now arsen-
ic can be dissolved in water by two proc-
esses. In cold water by shaking it con-
stantly for several hours (and the strongest
solution that can be obtained by the cold-
water process is a one-per-cent. solution,
which is no stronger than the ordinary
Fowler's solution as sold in the shops).
That is called a "saturated solution" by
the cold-water process. A solution of
three or even four per cent, can be ob-
tained with boiling water, but only when
the water is kept on the constant boil for
several hours; and that is also called a
saturated solution," so that the phrase
saturated solution" may mean either a
weak solution of one per cent., such as is
gained by the cold-water process, or a
stronger solution of three per cent, by the
boiling-water process, and Mr. Justice Ste-

279

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

phen misdirected the jury as to the mean-
ing of the phrase "saturated solution."
He should have told them that a "satur-
ated solution " of arsenic is one which has
by any particular process taken up as much
arsenic and retained it in solution as is pos-
sible by that particular process, and that it
might consequently be either a weak or a
stronger solution, according as it has been
dissolved by the cold-water or boiling-water
process, by shaking for hours or boiling for
hours.

The questions put to the jury by Mr.
Justice Stephen upon the interpretation of
the phrase " saturated solution " which he
gave, namely, "How is it to be used?"
" Who is wanting such a quantity of strong
solution of arsenic? " are misdirections.

Mr. Clayton's Experiments

Counsel are referred to experiments
made with solutions of arsenic by Mr. E.
Godwin Clayton, of the firm of Hassall &

280

MR. CLAYTON'S EXPERIMENTS

Clayton. From these it will be seen that
by the experiment there marked B, where
the arsenic was shaken at intervals of
twenty minutes for six hours, the result
shows that it would require i86J^ grains
of water to carry half a grain of arsenic.
And that by experiment C, which is the
strongest possible solution by the cold-
water process, namely, one-per-cent.
strength (equal to Fowler's solution), it
would require 50 grains of water to
carry half a grain, but to obtain this
the arsenic has to be shaken with cold
water at Jrequent intervals for four
days.

Mr. Godwin Clayton, in his report as
to these experiments, remarks : " I think,
however, that as few people outside a
chemical laboratory would have the pa-
tience or opportunity to make a solution
by shaking it at short intervals during four
days, the solution obtained in experiment
B — namely, an arsenical strength of 0.268
per cent. — might be described in a popular

281

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

sense, though not with strict scientific ac-
curacy, as ' saturated solution of arsenic' "
But then if that be so, that is only about a
quarter of the strength of Fowler's solu-
tion! The evidence of Mr. Davies as to
the specific gravity of the meat juice being
considerably reduced ought, it is submitted,
not to have been received as scientific evi-
dence, and it was a misdirection to treat it
as such, because without the slightest diffi-
culty, as will be seen by a reference to Mr.
Godwin Clayton's experiments, Mr. Da-
vies's evidence ought to have been scien-
tifically exact, because he could have
shown that (for example) if a solution of
the strength of experiment B had been
used, the 411 grains of liquid would have
contained i86J^ of solution of arsenic and
2^3^ grains of meat juice; and, further,
that the specific gravity of the meat juice
would, in that case, have been lowered
from 1.2143 to 1. 1263; and it was, there-
fore, not only possible, but the duty of Mr.
Davies, as an expert, to have shown, by

282

MR. CLAYTON'S EXPERIMENTS ^

comparing the specific gravity of the bottle
No. 10 and the specific gravity of Valen-
tine's meat juice, that the " arsenic in solu-
tion" which had been introduced into it
had been introduced into it out of that par-
ticular bottle, No. lo.

Then, again, it will be seen from these
experiments of Mr. Godwin Clayton that if
the solution in bottle No. lo had been a
strong hot-water solution of three per cent.,
the specific gravity would not have been
considerably reduced, because the meat
juice would in that case have contained
only isJ^ grains of arsenical solution. To
have obtained such a solution, the "ar-
senic powder " must have been boiled with
distilled water for four hours ; and it is sub-
mitted that it would have been impossible^
in the first place, for Mrs. Maybrick, or any
person outside a laboratory, to have adopted
such a process of dissolving arsenic without
the knowledge of the servants or anybody
else ; and, further, that even if she could
have done this, she could not have possibly

283

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

weighed out exactly half a grain of it, which
is what Mr. Davies found ; and it is sug-
gested that the only way in which that half
grain of arsenic could possibly have been
measured into that bottle, must have been
by introducing Fowler's solution, and no
Fowler^ s solution was found in the house —
and in no way was it suggested that Mrs.
Maybrick had any access to any, though
others in that house may have been able to
procure such a medicinal dose of it.

Misdirection as to Arsenic in Gly-
cerin

As regards the glycerin, fnspector Bax-
endale said he found this bottle in the lava-
tory on the 1 8th of May. There was no
evidence that this bottle had ever been in
Mrs. Maybrick's hands, and there was no
evidence that any part of it had been used
by James Maybrick. There was evidence
that it was a freshly opened bottle. Scien-
tific evidence will be forthcoming that it is

284

ARSENIC IN GLYCERIN

an absolute impossibility for any person to
distribute arsenic evenly through a pound
of glycerin.

It is suggested that there is no possible
means by which that glycerin could have
been administered with a felonious intent
to James Maybrick; the mere moistening
the lips with small quantities of it could
not have operated in that way.

Scientific evidence will be forthcoming
that glycerin, when kept in glass bottles,
generally does contain arsenic, which it ex-
tracts from the glass of the bottle.

In 1888 Jahns drew attention to arsenic
being present in glycerin — Chemische Zei-
tung.

In 1889 Vulpius also drew attention to it
— Apotheker Zeitung.

Siebold (see Pharmaceutical Journal^
5th October, 1889) said, at the Pharmaceu-
tical Conference, on the nth September,
1889, that his experiments were made with
toilet and pharmaceutical glycerin, and that

the majority showed presence of arsenious

285

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

acid, varying from i grain in 4,000 to i
grain in 5,000.

It may be pointed out that this is a lar-
ger quantity than Mr. Davies found, which
was only "about -^ oi 'a^ grain in ipoo
grains."

The evidence relating to the administra-
tion of glycerin was that of Nurse Gore and
Nurse Gallery, and was to the efiFect that
on Thursday night they refreshed James
Maybrick's mouth with glycerin aTtd borax
mixed in a saucer that was on the table in
the sick-room, and that Mrs. Maybrick had
brought the glycerin that was used either
from the medicine cupboard in her room or
from the washstand drawer.

The attention of counsel is called to the
fact that this saucer of mixed glycerin and
borax which was actually used was not
produced at the trial, but Justice Ste-
phen, when summing up to the jury, said:
" Then you get the blue bottle which con-
tained Price's glycerin. Here is the bottle,
which there is no evidence to show that

286

ARSENIC IN GLYCERIN

Mrs. Maybrick had even seen or touched ;
a considerable portion is still left. That
glycerin was found in the lavatory outside,
and if the bottle were filled and the same
proportion of arsenic added, there would
be two-thirds of a grain of arsenic in it.
You have heard already that his mouth
was moistened with glycerin and borax ap-
parently the night before he died. If that
be so, and the glycerin be really poison, it
is certainly a very shocking result to arrive
at." Sir Charles Russell: "I think the
evidence of Nurse Gore is that the bottle
that was used the night before was taken,
not from the lavatory, but from the cup-
board of the washstand.*' His Lordship :
"It does not follow that that was the same
bottle. One does not know the history of
that bottle or where it went to. It may or
may not have been the glycerin which was
used for the purpose I have mentioned,
namely, for moistening the lips. But it
does appear in the case that a bottle was
found in the lavatory, and that it contained

287

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

a grain of arsenic, and that his mouth was
moistened with glycerin and borax during
the night in question ; but the identity be-
tween that bottle and the bottle which con-
tained the glycerin is not established and
not proved/'

It is submitted that the above was an
unfair and inflammatory suggestion^ and
amounts to a gross misdirection, especially
after all the evidence about the condition
of deceased's tongue and his complaining
of a sensation as of a hair in his throat.

This concludes the whole of the evidence
to any articles containing arsenic which
were found in the house, in which the ar-
senic was present in anything except as un-
weighable " traces'' [

Misdirection as to Evidence of

Physicians

Justice Stephen further summed up:
" The witness (Dr, Stevenson) stated : ' I
should say more arsenic was administered

288

HON. JOHN HAY,

THE

NEW YORK

PUBLIC LIBRAKY

\\ Astor, Lenox and TMden
Foundations.

EVIDENCE OF PHYSICIANS

on the 3d of May.' " It will be seen, by a
reference to Dr. Stevenson's evidence, that
Dr. Stevenson did not say this.

Dr. Humphreys was the only medical
man in attendance at that time. The only
symptoms on Friday, the 3d, were that he
had " vomited twice." At the inquest Dr.
Humphreys said as to this:

Q. "Did he say anything about his
lunch on the previous day, Thursday, the

2d?"

A. "Yes; he said some inferior sherry
had been put into it, and that it had made
him as bad as ever again."

And that also appears in Dr. Steven-
son's evidence at the trial :

"He told the doctor he had not been
well since the previous day, when I learn
he had his lunch at the office."

It can not be suggested that the fact that
the man vomited twice on Friday night
was attributable to any arsenic taken at
midday on Thursday, for Dr. Stevenson
testified that the vomiting, which is a
19 289

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

symptom of arsenic, usually follows the ad-
ministration in about half an hour.

Dr. Carter, who was not called in to the
patient until Tuesday, May 7th, in his evi-
dence, however, suggested that :

" I judge that the fatal dose must have
been given on Friday, the 3d, but a dose
might have been given after that. When
he was so violently ill on the Friday, I
thought it would be from the effects of the
fatal dose, but there might have been sub-
sequent doses " ; and in cross-examination
he explained that he had made this sugges-
tion about the fatal dose because : " I was
told he was unable to retain anything on
his stomach for several days."

It is submitted that the judge, when
summing up, misdirected the jury by ignor-
ing entirely the evidence and substituting
for it this reckless suggestion of Dr. Car-
ter's.

390

TIMES OF ADMINISTRATION

Misdirection as to Times When Arsenic
May Have Been Administered

The only occasions on which it was pos-
sible to suggest any act of administration
of arsenic were the medicine on the 27th
of April and the food at the office on May
ist and May 2d; and the judge told the
jury:

" The argument that the prisoner admin-
istered the arsenic is an argument depend-
ing upon the combination of a great variety
of circumstances of suspicion. The theory
is that there was poisoning by successive
doses, and it is rather suggested that there
may have been several doses. But I do
not know that there was any effort made to
point out the precise times at which doses
may have been administered."

Under such circumstances it is submit-
ted that the statement of the judge as to
the medicine on the 27th of April, and as
to the food at office, and as to the state-
ment that " Friday (3d May) was the day

291

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

on which began the symptoms of what may
be called the fatal dose," are misdirections
of vital importance to this case^ and such as
to entitle Mrs. Maybrick to have the ver-
dict set aside and have a new trial ordered.

Misdirection as to Mrs. Maybrick's
Changing Medicine Bottles

As regards the question of attempts to
administer arsenic, the occasions upon
which such conduct was imputed are
changing medicine from one bottle into
another and the Valentine's meat juice.
As regards the changing the bottle, there
were two occasions when evidence was
given as to Mrs. Maybrick's doing this.
The first was on the 7th of May, when
Alice Yapp said that some of the medi-
cines were kept on a table near the bed-
room door and some in the bedroom, and
that on Tuesday, 7th of May, she saw Mrs.
Maybrick on the landing near the bedroom

door, and what was she doing? She was

292

CHANGING MEDICINE BOTTLES

apparently pouring something out of one
bottle into another. They were medicine
bottles.

That is the whole evidence as to the in-
cident, and as all the bottles in the house
were analyzed, and none found to contain
even a trace of arsenic except the Clay and
Abraham's bottle— which James Maybrick
was not taking at that time— the judge
could not properly direct the jury to re-
gard it as a matter of suspicion ; but he did
do so. He referred to this incident thus :

" On the 28th April (the day after the
Wirrall Races) Mrs. Maybrick sent for Dr.
Humphreys, and afterward she was seen
pouring medicine from one bottle into an-
other."

It is submitted that this was a serious
misdirection.

The other occasion was on Friday, the
loth of May, when Michael Maybrick, see-
ing Mrs. Maybrick changing a medicine
from one bottle to another in the bedroom,
took the bottles away and had the prescrip-

293

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

tion made up again, saying: " Florrie, how
dare you tamper with the medicine?"
Mrs. Maybrick explained that she was only
putting the medicine into a larger bottle
because there was so much sediment.
Nurse Gallery was present and there was
no concealment about what she was doing,
and the bullying conduct of Michael was
absolutely without any sort of justification.
These bottles were analyzed and found to
be harmless.

Mr. Justice Stephen turned this incident,
which occurred on the afternoon before
death, and after she had been prevented
from attending on her husband, against
Mrs. Maybrick, thus — quoting Michael's
evidence: "In the bedroom I found Mrs.
Maybrick pouring from one bottle into an-
other and changing the labels, and I said,
* Florrie, how dare you tamper with the
medicine ? ' " And Justice Stephen contin-
ued : " Verily, this was a strange — I don't
say strange considering the circumstances

— but dreadfully unwelcome remark to

294

INTENT TO KILL

make to a lady in her own house, when she
was in attendance on her husband, and
something which 'showed the state of feel-
ing in his mind, and must have attracted
her attention." It is submitted that this
was a misdirection.

Misdirection as to Administration with

Intent to Kill

There was also an attempt by the prose-
cution to suggest an attempt to administer
medicine, arising out of an occasion when
James May brick said to her, "You have
given me the wrong medicine again," from
which it appears that on the Friday, the
day before death, Mrs. Maybrick was not
giving him anything at all, but was trying
to get him to take some medicine from
Nurse Gallery, who was endeavoring to
induce him to take it. This was one of
the medicines ordered by Dr. Humphreys,
and was found free from arsenic. The
judge did not refer to this in his summing-

295

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

up, but reference to it is introduced here
because it exhausts the whole evidence,
with the exception of the Valentine's meat
juice incident, as to any suggestions or
even of any occasions of attempt to admin-
ister, while Mr. Matthews advised the
Queen that " the evidence leads clearly to
the conclusion that the prisoner adminis-
tered and attempted to administer arsenic
to her husband with intent to murder,"
which formed his ground for consigning
this woman to penal servitude for life.
No evidence^ either of any act of adminis-
tration or of any act of attempt to adminis-
ter either with or without felonious attempts
was given at the trials which possibly could
have led any person to any such conclusion^
with the single exception of the Valen-
tine's meat juice ; and as none of that was
administered after it had been in Mrs.
Maybrick's hands, the utmost that could
be said of it (assuming that she did put any
arsenic into it) is that it was an attempt to
administer, either feloniously or otherwise.

296

PRISONER'S TESTIMONY

It is submitted that the judge misdirected
the jury as to this incident, in that he did
not tell them that the mere evidence of an
attempt to administer arsenic was not suffi-
cient — that they must be satisfied that the
attempt to administer was with a mens rea
and with an intent to murder.

Exclusion of Prisoner's Testimony

Mrs. Maybrick voluntarily told her solic-
itors, Mr. Arnold and Mr. Richard Cleaver,
directly she was arrested and even be-
fore the inquest, that she had, at her hus-
band's urgent request, put a powder into a
bottle of Valentine's meat juice, but that
she did not know, until Mrs. Briggs in-
formed her that arsenic had been found in
a bottle of meat juice, that the powder she
had put in was assumably arsenic. [At
the trial both Mr. Richard and Mr. Arnold
Cleaver, her solicitors, offered to give evi-
dence to this effect, but Justice Stephen
refused to admit it.] She also tried to tell

397

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

Mrs. Briggs the same thing, but the police-
man stopped the conversation; and she
also told it to her mother on her arrival.
Mrs. Maybrick made no attempt at con-
cealment about having put this powder in,
although no one had seen her do it, and
her solicitors, instead of relying as a line of
defense on showing there was no "mens
rea " in what she had done, kept back her
account of what she had done. At the
trial, however, after all the evidence for the
prosecution had been concluded without a
single witness speaking of her having put
anything into anything, she insisted on tell-
ing the jury, as she had told her solicitors,
that she did put a powder into a bottle of
meat juice, in accordance with an urgent
request of her husband's, but that she did
not know it was arsenic. If she did not
know, there was no "mens rea." Uix)n
that evidence, and upon certain suspicious
circumstances connected with her conduct
in taking the meat juice into the dressing-
room and replacing it in the bedroom, the

298

IDENTITY OF MEAT-JUICE BOTTLE

judge, as it is submitted, misdirected the
jury in the following passage:

" Mr. Michael Maybrick says : ' Nothing
was given to my brother out of that.' That
is to say, nothing was given to him out of
the bottle of Valentine's meat juice, which
undoubtedly had arsenic in it. Its pres-
ence was detected, but of that bottle which
was poisoned he certainly had none. He
had a small taste of it before it was poisoned^
gfiven him by Nurse Gore."

It is submitted that the words "before it
was poisoned " is a gross misdirection.

Misdirection as to Identity of Meat-
Juice Bottle

It may be convenient here to interpose
the following remarks on the subject of the
identity of the bottle. Counsel will ob-
serve that the judge referred to the evi-
dence at the inquest and at the magisterial
inquiry, which, it is suggested, enables a
reference to any discrepancies in the evi-

299

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

dence of the witnesses on the three occa-
sions — inquest, magisterial inquiry, and
trial.

The identity of the half-used bottle,
which was found to contain " half a grain
of arsenic in solution," with the bottle
which Mrs. Maybrick took into the dress-
ing-room, was not proved. It was assumed
alike by the prosecution and the defense,
and by Mrs. Maybrick herself, but it was
not proved. It was proved that there was
another half-used bottle, of which James
Maybrick had partaken on Monday, 6th of
May, when Dr. Humphreys said:

"Some of the Valentine's meat juice
had been taken, but it did not agree with
the deceased and made him vomit. Wit-
ness did not remember him vomiting in his
presence, but he complained of it. Wit-
ness told deceased to stop the Valentine's
meat juice, and said he was not surprised
at it making Mr. Maybrick sick, as it made
many people sick."

There was, therefore, another half-used

300

IDENTITY OF MEAT-JUICE BOTTLE

bottle. The attention of counsel is strong-
ly directed to the question of the identity
of this half-used bottle.

Besides the one in which the arsenic was
detected, there was another half-used bottle
produced at the trial, which was found by
Mrs. Briggs after death in one of James
Maybrick's hatboxes in the dressing-room,
together with the black solutions and white
solutions of arsenic, and this bottle was
found free of arsenic.

As to the bottle which Mrs. Maybrick
had in her hands on the night of the 9th-
loth of May, and which she took into the
dressing-room, and as to which she volun-
teered the statement that she had put a
powder in, as to which evidence was given
by Nurse Gore, was thus voluntarily cor-
roborated by Mrs. Maybrick in her state-
ment to the jury. From this it appears
that Nurse Gore, on her arrival for duty
on Thursday night, opened a fresh bottle
of meat juice, which had been given to her
the night before by Edwin Maybrick, and

301

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CAS:

gave the patient one or two spoonfuls, arv
then placed it on the table, from which sH<
shortly afterward saw Mrs. Maybrick
move it and take it into the dressing-roo]
the door of which was not shut, and thei
return with it into the bedroom and r^
place it on the table. Nurse Gore thoughl
she did this in a stealthy way. It must hi
remembered that Nurse Gore was naturally
suspicious, as is shown by the fact that on
two previous occasions she suggested sus-
picions with regard to changes in medi-
cines by Mrs. Maybrick, which on analy-
sis were proved to be free from arsenic.
When the patient, a short time afterward,
awoke, Mrs. Maybrick came into the bed-
room again and removed the bottle from the
table and placed it on the washstand, where
there were only the ordinary jugs and ba-
sins, and there left it. Nurse Gore's usual
suspicions were aroused and she gave the
patient none of it, nor did Mrs. Maybrick
ask her to give him any. When Nurse
Gore was relieved by Nurse Gallery the

302

IDENTITY OF MEAT-JUICE BOTTLE

lext morning (Friday, the loth), at ii
>'clock, she called her attention to it and
isked her to take a sample ofit^ which Cal-
iery did, and put it into an ordinary medi-
nne bottle, which Nurse Gore gave her for
the purpose. Nurse Gore left the bottle
Dn the washstand where Mrs. Maybrick
had placed it. Nurse Gore did not men-
tion the circumstance to Dr. Humphreys
when he carne to see the patient at 8:30
A.M., nor to Michael Maybrick, whose at-
tention she directed to a bottle of brandy
instead, which on analysis was found harm-
less ; and she then went into Liverpool and
saw the matron, and on her return to the
house at 2 o'clock told Gallery to throw
away the sample in accordance with the
matron's orders, which Gallery did. The
bottle in which that sample was taken was
not specially identified, though it must
have remained on the premises. It ought
to have been produced, because, if arsenic
was detected in the sample, the bottle of
Valentine's meat juice would have been

303

. I

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

identified by that meians, and it would have
been shown that the arsenic was in the
meat juice which Mrs. Maybrick had taken
into the dressing-room. On the other
hand, as all the bottles which were iti the
house were analyzed and found free of at-
senic, there is negative evidence that there
was ho arsenic in the sample taken.

Misdirection in Excluding CoRkoBORA-
TioN OF Prisoner's Statement

Now the feerious, most serious, consider-
ation of counsel is asked for in comparing
the evidence of these three witnesses —
Gotiej Gallery, and Michael Maybrick — as
given at the coroner's inquest, as it appears
in the coroner's depositions, at the magis-
terial inquiry, as it appears in the magis-
trates' depositions, and as given at the trial.
It will be seen that there are great discrep-
ancies as to the place in the room from
which Michael Maybrick took the half-used
bottle itt which Mr. Davies, the analyst,

304

CORROBORATION OP PRISONER

subsequently detected one-tenth of a grain
€^ arsenic in solution. It is suggested that
Mr. Michael's evidence at the inquest is
the true account of where he got the bottle,
and that his evidence at the trial is cooked,
to suit the evidence of Gore, and that the
iiientity of the bottle is not established. The
statement, which in her statement to the
jury Mrs. Maybrick said she was prevented
by the policeman from making to Mrs.
Briggs, the moment that person told her
about arsenic being found in the meat
juice, was communicated by Mrs. Maybrick
at once to her solicitors, Mr. Arnold and
Richard Cleaver; and it is submitted that
it was a misdirection of the judge to ex-
clude their evidence in corroboration of
such a material and important fact in her
favor, and a misdirection in refusing to al-
low corroboration in that way of what was
in evidence, and did corroborate it — there-
by constituting a matter which the jury
should have had before them, as having a
bearing on her statement,
ao 305

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

Misdirections to Jury to Draw Illegal

Inferences

The judge referred to the Valentine's
meat-juice incident, the most vital point in
the trial, in the following extraordinary
manner at the end of his summing-up :

" I may say this, however : supposing
you find a man dying of arsenic, and it is
proved that a person put arsenic in his
plate, and if he gives an explanation which
you do not consider satisfactory — that is a
very strong question to be considered-
how far it goes, what its logical value is, I
am not prepared to say — I could not say,
and unless I had to write my verdict I
should not say how I should deal with the
verdict; but being no juryman, but only a
judge, I can only say this, it is a matter for
your serious consideration."

It is submitted that this was a gross mis-
direction and a cruel taunt to drive the jury
into finding a verdict against the prisoner

306

ILLEGAL INFERENCES

upon that ground, and it is submitted that
so monstrously unfair an utterance can not
be Jhund in the reports of any summing-up
by any judge in any criminal case. See
also another misdirection where the judge
read the examination of Nurse Gore and
omitted reference to the sample, but said of
the bottle, "In point of fact, it remained
where it was until taken away by Mr. Mi-
chael Maybrick," when it is in evidence
that Nurse Gallery had taken a sample of
it during the eighteen hours it remained
on the washstand, and that others beside
Mrs. Maybrick had access to it.

It is submitted that, apart from the ques-
tion of the identity of the bottle, there was
no evidence, except Mrs. Maybrick's state-
ment, that she had put anything into the
bottle, which justified Mr. Justice Stephen
in using the words, " He had a small taste
of it bejore it was poisoned," inasmuch as,
except Mrs. Maybrick's own voluntary
statement that she had put a powder into
a bottle of meat juice, there was nothing to

307

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

show that the arsenic, detected by Mr.
Davies in the bottle he analyzed, had not
been in the bottle when Edwin Maybrick
gave it to Nurse Gore and which she
opened when she gave the patient " one or
two spoonfuls."

Another misdirection in reference to the
meat-juice incident will be found in the
summing-up in the words :

" It has a sort of very remote bearing
upon the statement which she made on
Monday."

Instead of " a sort of very remote bear-
ing," it was a matter of the greatest impor-
tance that it should be shown that at the
very instant she heard that arsenic had
been found in some meat juice, before
even the inquest, and before any arsenic
had been found in the body^ she should
have attempted to tell Mrs. Briggs that
she had put a powder into some meat
juice, but did not know what it was ; and,
in connection with this, the attention of

counsel is called to the fact that Mr. Justice

308

REGARDING MEDICAL TESTIMONY

Stephen refused to allow evidence showing
that she had made this statement from the
very first.

Misdirections Regarding the Medical

Testimony

As to the cause of James Maybrick's
death, there was a most remarkable con-
flict of medical opinion. It was not un-
til the post-mortem examination, held on
Monday, the 13th of May, by Drs. Carter
and Humphreys (the medical men who
had attended the deceased during his ill-
ness), and Dr. Barron, that the cause of
death was ascertained, and it was then
found to be exhaustion, caused by gastro-
enteritis or acute inflammation of the stom-
ach and intestines, which, in their opinion,
had been set up by an irritant poison, but
might have been set up by his getting wet
through.

These doctors agreed that by the phrase
" irritant poison " they meant any unwhole-
some food or drink.

309

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

Up to the time of death the doctors,
Messrs. Humphreys and Carter, had sup-
posed and treated the patient for dyspep-
sia, notwithstanding that suggestions had
been made to them by Michael Maybrick
that the patient was being poisoned ; and
they said in their evidence that but for the
discovery of arsenic on the premises^ they
would have given a certificate of death /ram
natural causes.

At the post-mortem examination they
selected such portions of the body for an-
alysis as they considered necessary, includ-
ing, among other things, the stomach and
its contents ; and the analyst employed by
the police (Mr. Yy^svt^ found no arsenic in
the stomach or its contents^ and was unable
to discover any weighable traces of arsenic
in any other portions of the body.

About three weeks afterward the body
was, by order of the Home Secretary,
exhumed, and fresh portions of it were
taken for analysis, some of which were
examined by Mr. Davies and other parts

310

REGARDING MEDICAL TESTIMONY

by Dr. Stevenson, one of the Crown an-
alysts.

In those portions taken at the exhuma-
tion, the total result of the search for ar-
senic in the body was that Mr. Davies ac-
tually found unweighable arsenic, i-^ of a
grain, in the liver, and Dr. Stevenson Yihf
of a grain in the liver and yfro^ i^i the intes-
tines, making, when all added together, the
total amount as found by Mr. Davies and
Dr. Stevenson about one-tenth of a grain,
made up of minute fractional portions of
one-hundredths and one-thousandths.

It was shown in evidence that the small-
est fatal dose of arsenic ever recorded was
two grains, which was in the case of a
woman, and who presumably was not an
arsenic-eater.

It was shown in evidence that in the year
1888 Mrs. Maybrick had asked Dr. Hopper
(who was at that time, and had been for
many years, their regular medical attend-
ant) to speak to Mr. Maybrick and prevent
him taking certain medicines, which were

311

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

doing him harm ; that early in March she
made the same appeal to Dr. Humphreys,
suggesting at the time that Mr. Maybrick
was taking a white powder^ which she
thought was strychnin.

At the magisterial inquiry Dr. Hum-
phreys stated that Mrs. Maybrick had, on
the occasion of his being called in to the
patient on the 28th of April, also spoken
to him about her husband taking this white
powder, and that in consequence of this he
asked Mr. Maybrick about taking strych-
nin and nux vomica.

Counsel will find proof, in the evidence
given at the trial by Dr. Hopper, Mr.
Heaton, Nicholas Bateson, Esq., Capt.
Richard Thompson, Thomas Stansell, and
Sir James Poole, ex-Mayor of Liverpool, as
to the arsenic habit of James Maybrick and
his opportunities for obtaining the drug.
[To which must now be added the statuto-
ry declaration of Valentine Charles Blake,
son of the late Sir Valentine Blake, M.P.,
that he, about two months prior to Mr.

3J2

CONFLICT OF MEDICAL OPINION

Maybrick's death, had procured him 150
grains of arsenic] It may be stated here
that from the appearance of the little bot-
tles in which the white arsenic was found,
they had been in use for a long time and
were such as would be found as sample
bottles in the offices of business houses to
which it is unlikely Mrs. Maybrick would
have access.

It is submitted that the discovery of
such a tiny quantity of arsenic in the body
of a man addicted to such extraordinary
habits might reasonably be accounted for
by those habits.

Conflict of Medical Opinion

The conflict of medical opinion which
was exhibited on this trial arose upon the
point as to whether arsenic had been the
cause of the gastro-enteritis, of which it
was admitted that the man died.

There was no conflict of medical opinion
on the facts that the quantity found in the

313

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

body was insufficient to cause deaths nor that
gastro-enteritis might be set up by a vast
variety of things besides arsenic — in fact, by
any impure food or by excessive alcohol
or by getting wet through. It was shown
in evidence that Mr. Maybrick got wet
through at the Wirrall Races on the 27th of
April, and that he afterward went in his
wet clothes to dinner at a friend's .on the
other side of the Mersey.

The conflict of medical opinion amount-
ed to this, that the Crown called Drs. Car-
ter and Humphreys, who both admitted
that they had never previously attended a
case of arsenical poisonings nor had ever be-
fore attended a post-mortem examination of
a person whose death had been attributed to
arsenic — in short, that they had had no ex-
perience whatever. The Crown also called
Dr. Stevenson (who had not attended the
deceased, but had conducted the analysis
of parts of the body) as an expert in poi-
soning, and he said, as to the symptoms
during life : *' There is no distinctive diag-

314

CONFLICT OF MEDICAL OPINION

nostic symptom of arsenical poisoning.
The diagnostic thing is finding the ar-
seme.

The Crown also had Dr. Barron, who
had attended the post-mortem, and who ex-
pressed himself unable to say that arsenic
was the cause of the gastro-enteritis.

These witnesses, it may be observed,
gave their evidence both as to the symph
toms during life and as to the appearances
at the post-mortem before the medical evi-
dence for the defense had been called.

The witnesses called for the defense had
none of them attended the deceased, but
were called as experts in poisoning, viz..
Dr. Tidy, a Crown analyst. Dr. Macna-
mara, and Professor Paul, who all gave
positive evidence that neither the symp-
toms during life nor the appearance after
death were such as could be attributed to
arsenical poisoning; that, in fact, they
pointed away from ^ instead of toward, ar-
senic being the cause of death.

The evidence of these witnesses was

315

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

summarized very fairly by Mr. Justice
Stephen.

In the face of such a conflict of medical
opinion, it is submitted that Mr. Justice
Stephen should have refused to allow the
jury to return any verdict of guilty at all.

Misdirections as to Cause of Death

On the first day of his summing-up,
however, Mr. Justice Stephen told the jury
as to the law under which they were to
return their verdict : " You have been told
that if you are not satisfied in your minds
about poisoning — if you think he died
from some other disease — then the case is
not made out against the prisoner. It is
a necessary step — it is essential to this
charge — that the man died of poison^ and
the poison suggested is arsenic. This is
the question you have to consider, and it
must be the foundation of a judgment un-
favorable to the prisoner that he died of

arsenic."

316

CAUSE OF DEATH

It is submitted that Mr. Justice Stephen
tnisdirected the jury when he told them to
satisfy their minds whether he died from
any other disease, inasmuch as the only
question before the jury was whether the
cause of death was arsenic.

" The question for you is by what the ill-
ness was caused. Was it caused by arsenic
or by some other means ? "

It is submitted that that is a misdirection.
It might have been put to a coroner's jury,
but it was not a question which should
have been put to a jury at a criminal trial.

It is submitted that he misdirected the
jury in not also telling them that it was es-
sential to a verdict unfavorable to the pris-
oner that the arsenic of which he died had
been administered by hery and also in not
telling the jury that it was essential to a
verdict unfavorable to the prisoner that, if
she had administered any, she had done it
with intent to destroy life.

317

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

Misdirection to Ignore Medical

Testimony

Mr. Justice Stephen then proceeded:
"Now, let us see what the doctors say.
Some say death was caused by arsenic, and
others that it was not by arsenic — that he
died of gastro-enteritis " ; and he spoke of
the medical evidence in a way which
amounted to a direction to the jury that
they were to treat it as tainted with subtle
partizanship ^ and as evidence to which it
was not necessary for them to attach seri-
ous importance. He, in fact, stated, and in
so doing misdirected the jury, that though
it was essential to a verdict unfavorable
to the prisoner that he died of arsenic, that
question was one which they, the jury,
could come to their own opinion adouty
without taking into consideration the opin-
ion of the medical experts ^ who had posi-
tively stated that arsenic was not the cause
of death. In other words, he directed the
jury that, as the medical experts could not

318

TO IGNORE MEDICAL TESTIMONY

agree that the cause of death was arsenical
poisoning, it was for them to decide that
question from their own ''knowledge of
human nature r

On the second day of the summing-up
the judge told the jury (and it is submitted
that it contains ^n?^^ misdirections): " You
must consider the case as a mere medical
case^ in which you are to decide whether
the man did or did not die of arsenic ac-
cording to the medical evidence. You
must not consider it as ^^ mere chemical case^
in which you decide whether the man died
from arsenic which was discovered as the
result of a chemical analysis. You must
decide it as a greats high, and important
case^ involving in itself not only medical
and chemical questions, but embodying in
itself a most highly important m^yral gues-
tion — and by that term, moral question, I
do not mean a question of what is right
and wrong in a moral point of view, but
questions in which human nature enters
and in which you must rely on your knowl-

319

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

edge of human nature in determining the
resolution you arrive at.

" You have, in the first place, to consider
— far be it from me to exclude or try to gret
others to exclude from their own minds
what I must feel myself vividly conscious
of — the evidence in this matter. I think
every human being in this case must feel
vividly conscious of what you have to con-
sider, but I had almost better say you
ought not to consider, for fear you might
consider it too much, the horrible nature
of the inquiry in which you are engaged.
I feel that it is a dreadful thing that you
are deliberately considering whether you
are to convict that woman of really as hor-
ribly dreadful a crime as ever any poor
wretch who stood in the dock was accused
of. If she is guilty — I am saying if my
object is rather to heighten your feeling of
the solemnity of the circumstances, and in
no way to prevent you from feeling as you
do feel, and as you ought to feel. I could
say a good many other things about the

320

THE
MEW YORK
PUBLIC LIBRARY

Astor, Lenox and TWen^
Foundations.

to IGNORE MEDICAL TESTIMONY

awful nature of the charge, but I do not
thihk it will be necessary to do Any one
thing. Your own hearts must tell you
what it is for a petson to ^o on adininister-
ing poison to a helplfess, sick mah, upon
whotn she has already inflicted a dreadful
injury — an injury fatal to married life ; the
pefsoh who could do such a thing a$ that
must be destitute of the least trace of hu-
man feeling." And fUrthe'r on : " We have
t6 consider this not in an Unfeeling spirit
— ^f ar from it-^but in the spirit of people
resolved to solve by mtellectuai nUans An
intellecttcal probiem of great difficulty l'

Mir. Justice Stephen, in short, instead
of putting to the jury for separate answers
each of the following three questions :

1 . Did this matt die of arsenic 'i

2. Did Mrs. Maybrick administer that
Arsenic }

3. Did she do it feloniously ?

ittvited them to return a verdict of

"guilty" or "'not guilty" upon a difectiott

of law, wherein he told them that tiiey
21 321

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

were to decide it as an intellecttuil problem^
on the question which, it is submitted, can
be formulated thus :

" Might this man have died of arsenic
notwithstanding the-opinion of the medical
experts that he did not die of arsenic?"
And the jury answered " Yes."

It is submitted that this was a gross mts-
direction.

It maybe interesting and applicable to
quote from a paper read by Sir Fitzjames
Stephen himself at the Science Associa-
tion in 1884: " It is not to be denied that,
so long as great ignorance exists on mat-
ters of physical and medical science in all
classes, physicians will occasionally have to
submit to the mortification of seeing not
only the jury, but the bar and bench it-
self, receive with scornful incredulity or
with self-satisfied ignorance evidence which
ought to be received with respect and at-
tention." How prophetic this was as ex-
emplified by his own attitude in this trial
need not be pointed out.

322

MISRECEPTION OF EVIDENCE

MiSRECEPTION OF EVIDENCE

Under the head of Misreception of Evi-
dence may be classed the observations of
the judge, where, apparently in order to
prevent the jury from being influenced in
favor of the prisoner ^ owing to the small
quantity of arsenic found in the body of
the deceased, he mentioned an instance of
a /a&g" being poisoned, in the body of which,
though it had taken a large number of
grains of arsenic, no arsenic was found
after its death. The judge, in other words,
turned himself into a witness for the prose-
cution. The unfairness to the prisoner of
such a course is obvious. Had the judge
been an ordinary witness he might have
been cross-examined to show, e^.^ that
zxsi^m.c passes away from the body of a dog
much more quickly than from that of a
man^ or that the circumstances as to time
and quantity taken were such as to prove
that there was no analogy between the two
cases. As the matter stands, the judge's

323

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

recollection of an experiment on a dog,
which had been made many years before,
was meant to rebut a proposition much re-
lied on by the defense, viz., that the small
quantity of arsenic found in the body of
the deceased was consistent with the view
that he was in the habit of taking arsenic^
rather than with the case for the Crown
that he had been intentionally poisoned-

Cruel Misstatement by the Coroner

The inquest was formally opened by
taking the evidence of the identification of
the deceased by his brother, Michael May-
brick, and then adjourned for a fortnight,
the coroner announcing that there had
been a post-mortem examination by Dr.
Humphreys, and that the result of that ex-
amination was that poison was found in the
stomach of the deceased in such quantities
as to justify further examination ; that the
stomach of the deceased, and its contents,
would meanwhile be chemically analyzed,

324

EVIDENCE FOR THE PROSECUTION

and on the result of that analysis would
depend the question whether or not crimi-
nal proceedings against some person would
fallow* Now the announcement that ** poi-
son had been found in the stomach of the
deceased " was cmiirary tajacty and in con-
sequence of this cruel misstatement the pro-
ceedings caused an immense amount of
popular excitement and prejudice against
the accused^ who, being too ill to be re*
moved, remained at Battlecrease House,
in charge of the police, till the following
Saturday morning, the i8th May, when a
sort of court inquiry was opened in Mrs.
Mayhrick's bedroom by Colonel Kdwell,
one of the county naagistrates.

Medical Evidence for the Prosecution

The evidence of Dr. Arthur Richard
Hopper, who had been Mr. and Mrs^ May*-
bricfc's meddcal adviser fox about seven
years, was taken. He had not atteiaded
Mr. Maybrick during his last illness^ but

32?5

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CAS£

spoke about Mrs. Maybrick having asked
him the year before to check her husband
from taking dangerous drugSy and that Mr.
Maybrick had admitted to him that he used
to dose himself with anything his friends
recommended, and that he was used to the
taking of arsenic.

Dr. Richard Humphreys spoke as to the
symptoms of the illness and his prescrip-
tions, and that he had not suspected poi-
soning until it was suggested to him and
his colleague. Dr. Carter, and that he had
himself administered arsenic to the de-
ceased, in the form of Fowler's solution, on
the Sunday or Monday before death, and
that he refused a certificate of death only
because arsenic had been found on thepremr
ises.

Dr. William Carter spoke of being called
the Tuesday before death, and he agreed
with Dr. Humphreys that an irritant poi-
son, most probably arsenic, was the cause
of death.

Dr. Alexander Barron gave evidence to

326

EVIDENCE FOR THE PROSECUTION

the effect that he was unable to ascertain
any particular poison.

Mr. Edward Davies, the analyst, was
called, and gave evidence to the effect
that he had found no weighable arsenic in
the portions of the body selected at the
post-mortem, but that he had subsequently
found one fiftieth of a grain of arsenic in a
part of the liver, nothing in the stomach or
its contents^ but trcLceSy not weighable^ in the
intestines, and that he had found arsenic in
some of the bottles and things found in the
house after death and in the Valentine's
meat juice.

The first issue which the jury at the trial
had to determine was whether it was proved
beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased
died from arsenical poisoning.

Mr. Justice Stephen, in his summing-up,
put this issue to the jury in the following
words :

"It is essential to this charge that the
man died of arsenic. This question must
be the foundation of a verdict unfavor-

327

ANALYSIS QF THE MAYBRICJC CASE
Bible to the prisoner, that he died a/ ar-

senicT

It must be assumed th^t this wa^ a ques-
tion exclusively for niedics^l experts, not-,
withstanding which the judge, in summing
up, told the jury :

" You must not consider this (^s a mere
medical case^ in which you are to decide
whether the man did or did nQt die of ar-.
senic poisoning according; to the inedical evi-
ctmce. You n^ust not consider it as a m^e
chemical case, in which you decide whether
the man diedjrom arsenic which was dis-
covered as the result of a chemical analysis.
You must decide it ^s a gnat and highly
important ^ase, involving in itself not only
medical s^nd chemical questions, but involve
ing in itself a most highly in^port^nt moral
qt^stuml'

Maybrick Died a Natural Death

Dr, Humphreys gave it as his apinion
that the appearances at the post^n^ortem
were consistent wth congestion of the stom-

328

MAY?RICK DIED A NATURAL DEATH

ach not necessarily caus^ ky ^^ irritant
poison, aiiidi that the symptoms during life
were also consistent with congestion not
caused by an irritant poison, but with acute
inflammation of the stomach ^nd intes-
tine^, prcMiuced by any cause whatever, and
which would produce similar ps^thologica^
results. H^ thouight death wa^ caused by
sonie irritant poison, most likely arsenic^
hut he wp^ld not like to swear thqt if
%v(is. Dr, Humphreys' evidence, therefore,
arnounted to this, that the deces^sed died
fron^ gastro^enteritis, a natural disease, at-
tributable tp ^ variety of causes, and that^
^part f rpn^ the suggestions already referred
to, he would have certified ^accordingly,

Dr, Humphrey Si' evidence was confirmed
by that of Dr. Carter, who stated he came
to the same conclusion as Dr. Humphreys,
"hut in a more positive manner," Pr.
Carter had assisted at the post-mprtem exr
amin^tion, beside^ being in close attend-
ance on the deceased for the five days pre-:

ceding his death, which he attributed to

3?9

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

taking some irritant wine or decomposed
meat, or to some grave error of diet ; and
when pressed as to whether he had any rea-
son to suppose the article taken was poi-
son, he explained that he did, but that by
poison he meant something that was bad —
it might be tinned meat, which the de-
ceased had partaken of at the race dinner,
or wine, or something which had set up
gastritis. This witness's account of the
post-mortem was that ^tyjaund no arse-
ntCy but merely evidence of an irritant poi-
son in the stomach and intestines, probably
arsenic. Dr. Carter's evidence was there-
fore against poisoning by arsenic being con-
clusively accepted as the cause of death,
although subsegtcently he said he had no
doubt it was arsenic.

Dr. Barron's evidence as to the cause of
death was that he considered from the post-
mortem appearances that death was due to
inflammation of the stomach and bowels,
due to some irritant poison, but that he
was unable to point to the particular poi-

330

Witness for the prosecuTioJj

son, apart from what he heard; and,
pressed as to what he meant by poison, the
witness stated that poison might be bad
tinned meat, bad fish, mussels, or generally
bad food of any kind, or alcohol taken in
excess.

The Chief Witness for the
Prosecution

Dr. Stevenson expressed his opinion that
the deceased died from arsenic poisoning,
giving as his reasons that the main symp-
toms were those attributable to an irritant
poison, and that they more closely resem-
bled those of arsenic than of any other
irritant of which he knew. He stated that
he had known a great number of cases of
poisoning by arsenic in every shape, and
that he acted officially for the Home Office
and Treasury in such cases. Dr. Steven-
son was the witness of the prosecution, and
gave his evidence before he had heard the
evidence for the defense.

Dr. Stevenson also stated that the gen-

331

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

eral symptoms of arsenic poisoning ap-
peared within half an hour of taking some
article of food or medicine, and were nau-
sea, with a sinking sensation of the stom-r
ach ; vomiting, which, unlike that produced
by any ordinary article of food or drink
that disagrees, afforded as a rule no relief
and often came on again; that there was
most commonly pain in the stomach, diar-
rhea ; after a time the region of the stom-
ach becomes tender under pressure, the
patient becomes restless, often bathed in
perspiration ; the throat is complained of ;
pain in the throat, extending down to the
stomach ; the tongue becomes very foul in
appearance and furred. There is not a bad
smell as in the ordinary dyspeptic tojc^ue,
a rapi4 and feeble pulse, thirst, great straior
ing at Sitool, vomits and evacuatioxis fre-
quently stained with blood. €tf fourteea
symptoma oi arsenic poisoning named by
Dr. Stevenson, Mr. Maybrick exhibited
only one, according to the testimony of Xh.
Stevenson. With the exception oi the foul

332

MEDICAL EVIDENCE FOR DEFENSE

tongue with malodorous breath, none of
these symptoms coincided with those given
by Drs. Humphreys and Carter, who were
in attendance on the patient, while Dr,
Stevenson never saw him.

Medical Evidence for Defense

Then came the evidence for the defense,
rebutting the presumption that death was
caused by arsenic. First in order being
Dr. Tidy, the examiner for forensic med-
icine at the London Hospital, and also,
like Dr. Stevenson, employed as an analyst
by the Home Office. This witness stated
that, within a few years, close upon forty
cases of arsenical poisoning had come be-
fore him, which enabled him to indicate
the recurring and distinctive indications
formed in such cases.

Dr. Tidy describes the symptoms of ar-
senic poisoning as purging and vomiting in
a very excessive degree ; a burning pain in
the abdomen, more marked in the pit of

333

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

the stomach, and increased considerably by
pressure, usually associated with pain in
the calves of the legs ; then, after a certain
interval, suffusion of the eyes — the eyes fill
with tears ; great irritability about the eye-
lids ; frequent intolerance of light.

Dr. Tidy added that there were three
symptoms, such as cramps, tenesmus,
straining, more or less present, but the
prominent symptoms were those he had
mentioned, especially the sickness, violent,
incessant sickness, and that poisoning by
arsenic was extremely simple to detect.
Further, that he (Dr. Tidy) had known
cases where one or more of the four symp-
toms mentioned had been absent, but he
had never known a case in which all four
symptoms were absent ; and stated that he
had followed every detail of the Maybrick
case so far as he could, and had read all the
depositions before the coroner and magis-
trate, and the account of the vomiting did
not agree with his description of excessive
and persistent vomiting, and was certainly

334

MEDICAL EVIDENCE FOR DEFENSE

not that kind of vomiting that takes place
in a typical case of arsenical poisoning.

Dr. Tidy further stated that, taking the
whole of the symptoms, they undoubtedly
were not those of arsenical poisoning, nor
did they point to such, but were perfectly
consistent with death from gastro-enteritis,
not caused by arsenical poisoning at all;
and that, had he been called upon to ad-
vise, he should have said it was undoubted-
ly not arsenical poisoning, and that his
view had been very much strengthened,
to use his own words, by the result of
the post-mortem, which distinctly pointed
away from arsenic.

Then there was the evidence, in the
same direction, of Dr. Macnamara, the
president of the Royal College of Surgeons,
and its representative on the General Med-
ical Council of the Kingdom, which is
summed up in the general question put to
him and his answer :

Question : Now, bringing your best judg-
ment to bear on the matter — you having

335

ANALYSIS OF THE MA^BRICK CASfe

b^n pi'esent at the whole of this trial ahd
heard the Evidence — in your opinion, Was
this death from arsenical poisoning^

Answer: Certainly not.

In ctioss^xaminatibh Dr. Macnamat^a
stated that,- to Wife best of his judgmeilt,
Mr. Maybrick died of g^astro-ehteritis, hot
connected with arsehical poisoniilg, and
which might have been Caused by thfe wet-
ting at the Wirtall races.

Dr. Paul, professor of medical jurispni-
dehcfe at UttivetsityColfeg^e, Liveittool, artd
pathologist it the Royal Ihfirtnary, stated
he llad made aild Assisted at something like
three or four thousand post-niortetti exaitti-
nations, and that the syrtiploms in the |pfes-
eirt case agreed With cases of gasirthenferi-
tis pure and simple ; that the finding of the
arsenic in the body, in the quantity men-
tioned in the evidence, was quite t:onsisteht
with the case of i man who had taken ar-
senic medicinally, but mho had left it off
f&r ^otne time^ even for several mdfiths.

336

A TOXICOLOGICAL STUDY

A ToxicoLOGiCAL Study

So positive were Dr. Tidy and Dr. Mac-
namara of their position as to the effect of
arsenic on the human system, that they
subsequently published "A Toxicological
Study of the Maybrick Case," thus chal-
lenging medical critics the world over to re-
fute them. From this study the following,
in tabular form, is taken, in order to con-
tract the symptoms from which Mr. May-
brick suffered with those which, it will be
generally admitted, are the usual symptoms
of arsenical poisoning :

Arsenicai. Poisoning Mr. Maverick's Case

Not so described.

Countenance tells of severe suf-
fering.

Very great depression an early
symptom.

Fire-burning pain in stomach.

Pain in stomach increased on
pressure.

Violent and uncontrollable vom-
iting independent of ingesta.

Vomiting not relieved by such
treatment as was used in Mr.
May brick's case.

Not present until to-
ward the end.

Not present.

Pressure produced no
pain.

" Hawking rather than
vomiting ;" irritability
of stomach increased
by ingesta.

Vomiting controlled by
treatment.

22 337

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

Arsenical Poisoning Mr. Maybrick's Case

During vomiting burning heat

and constriction felt in throat.
Blood frequently present in

vomited and purged matter.
Intensely painful cramps in

calves of the legs.
Pain in lu-inating.
Puiging and tenesmus an early

symptom.

Great intolerance of light.
Eyes suffused and smarting.
Eyeballs inflamed and reddened.
Eyelids intensely itchy.
Rapid and painful respiration

an early symptom.
Pulse small, frequent, irregular,

and imperceptible from the

outset.
Arsenic easily detected in urine

and faeces.
Tongue fiery red in its entirety,

or fiery red at tip and margins

and foul toward base.
Early and remarkable reduction

of temperature generally.

Not present.
Not present.
Not present.

Not present.

Not present until
twelfth day of iUness,
and then once only.

Not present.

Not so described until
approach of death.

Not detected, although
looked for.

Tongue not red ; " sim-
ply filthy."

Temperature normal up
to day preceding
death.

" Maybrick's symptoms are as unlike poi-
soning by arsenic as it is possible Jor a case
of dyspepsia to be. Everything distinctive
of arsenic is absent. The urine contained
no arsenic. The symptoms are not even
consistent with arsenical poisoning.

" Regarding the treatment adopted by

338

A TOXICOLOGICAL STUDY

the medical men, and more especially Dr.
Carter's action with regard to the meat
juice, we are justified in assuming that the
doctors themselves, even after a certain
suggestion had been made to them, did not
come to the conclusion that the illness of
Maybrick was the result of arsenic.

"It is noteworthy (i) that none was
found in the stomach; (2) that Maybrick
was in the habit of taking drugs, and
among them arsenic.

" Thus two conclusions are forced upon
us:

"(i) That the arsenic found in May-
brick's body may have been taken in mere-
ly medicinal doses, and that probably it
was so taken.

"(2) That the arsenic may have been
taken a considerable time before either his
death or illness, and that probably it was
so taken.

" Our toxicological studies have led us to
the three following conclusions :

" (i) That the symptoms from which
Maybrick suffered are consistent with any
form of acute dyspepsia, but that they
point away from, rather than toward, ar-

339

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

senic as the cause of such dyspeptic con-
dition.

" (2) That the post-mortem appearances
are indicative of inflammation, but that
they emphatically point away from arsenic
as the cause of death,

" (3) That the analysis fails to find more
than one- twentieth part of a fatal dose of
arsenic, and that the quantity so found is
perfectly consistent with its medicinal in-
gestionr

The Medical Weakness of the
Prosecution

Such was the complete evidence of the
cause of death. The quantity of arsenic
found in the body was ane-tenth of a grain,
and upon this evidence rests the first issue
the jury had to consider, namely, whether
it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that
the deceased died from arsenical poisoning.

As to the value of the medical testimony
on both sides, Dr. Humphreys admitted
that he never attended a ^ase of arsenical

WEAKNESS OF THE PROSECUTION

poisoning in his life, nor of any irritant poi-
son, and that he would have given a certifi-
cate of death from natural causes had he
not been told of arsenic found in the meat
juice.

Dr. Carter laid no claim to any previous
experience of poisoning by arsenic^ and was
unable to say from the post-mortem exam-
ination that arsenic was the cause of death,
which he could only attribute to an irritant
of some kind, and he admitted that it was
the evidence of Mr. Davies, as to the find-
ing of arsenic in the body, which led him
to the conclusion that arsenical poisoning
had taken place.

Dr. Barron did not see the patient, but
assisted at the post-mortem examination,
and stated that, judging by the appear-
ances and apart from what he had heard,
he was unable to identify arsenic as the
particular poison which had set up the in-
flammation.

Now, assuming for a moment that this
issue as to the cause of death rested en-

341

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

tirely upon the uncontradicted testimony
of these three doctors called for the prose-
cution, Humphreys, Carter, and Barron,
the jury would not have been justified in
coming to the conclusion that there was
no reasonable doubt that arsenic poisoning
was the cause of death. The doctors them-
selves had admitted that they were unable
to arrive at that conclusion, apart from the
evidence that arsenic was found in the
body. The idea of arsenical poisoning
never occurred to them from the symptoms^
until the use of arsenic was first sug-
gested.

The doctors could not say that death re-
sulted from arsenic poisoning, and yet the
jury have actually found that it didy in the
face of the opinions of three eminent medi-
cal experts, who say it did not.

Even if these doctors had never been
called at all for the defense, the jury were
yet not justified in taking the evidence of
Drs. Humphreys, Carter, and Barron, in
the terms which they themselves never in-

342

WEAKNESS OF THE PROSECUTION

tended to pledge themselves to, namely, to
exclude a reasonable doubt that death was
due to arsenic.

Let us consider the position of the medi-
cal men called for the defense : Drs. Tidy,
Macnamara, and Paul are the highest au-
thorities on medical and chemical jurispru-
dence in Great Britain. No sort of hesita-
tion or doubt attached to the opinions of
any of them, and their experience of post-
mortem examinations was referred to, as
including in the practise of Dr, Tidy, the
Crown analyst, some forty cases of arsenic
poisoning alone. Dr. Macnamara in-
dorsed the opinion of Dr. Tidy. In addi-
tion to that, there was on the same side the
evidence of Dr. Paul, professor of medical
jurisprudence and toxicology at University
College, Liverpool, with an experience of
three or four thousand post-mortem exami-
nations. It is impossible to conjecture by
what process of reasoning the jury could
have come to the conclusion, upon the evi-
dence before them, that it was beyond a

343

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

reasonable doubt that Mr. Maybrtck had
met his death by arsenical poisoning*

This volume of evidence before ths jury
pointed not only to a doubt as to the cause
of deaths but to a reasonable conclusion that
it was not due to arsenical poisoning. It is
inconceivable that the jury should have
found as they did, except under the mancUb-
tory direction of the judge ^ which left them
apparently no alternative but to substitute
his opinions and judgment for their own,
so that on that issue the finding was not so
much the finding of the jury^ to which the
prisoner was by law entitled^ but the finding
^the judge, of whom the jury ^ abrogating
their own functions^ became the mere mouth'
pieces.

The: Administration of Arsenic

The consideration of the facts as given
in evidence also covers the second issue
which the jury had to determine, namely,
whether, if arsenic poisoning was the cause
of death, it was the prisoner who adminis-

344

THE FLY-PAPER EPISODE

tered it with criminal intent. The evidence
on this point was most inconclusive.

No one saw the prisoner administer ar^
senic to her husband.

She had no opportunity of giving her
husband anything since one or two o'clock
on Wednesday afternoon (8th of May), af-
ter which she was closely watched by the
nurses. It was not shown that any food or
drink administered to the deceased by the
Prisoner contained arsenic. It was not
shown that the prisoner had placed arsenic
in any Jood or drink intended Jor her hus-
band's use. Nor, in fact, was any found,
although searched for, in any food or medi-
cine of which Mr. Maybrick partook during
his illness, except the arsenic in Fowler's
solution ^Prescribed and administered by Dr.
Humphreys himself.

The Fly-Paper Episode

The episode of the fly-papers may be
considered as one of the most important
factors in the whole case. It supplies, so

345

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

to speak, the only link between Mrs. May-
brick and arsenic, which, it is well known,
forms their chief ingredient. It was proved
she had purchased the fly-papers without
any attempt at concealment, and, while
soaking, they were exposed to everybody's
view, quite openly, in a room accessible to
every inmate of the house. It was not
suggested that Mrs. Maybrick bought the
other large quantity of arsenic, between sev-
enty and eighty grains, found in the house
after death, and no one came forward to
speak to any such purchase. It was found
in the most unlikely places for Mrs. May-
brick to have selected, if she had intended
to use it, and the evidence against her on
this point is of a particularly vagu^ and
indefinite character. [Justice Stephen,
commenting on the quantity of arsenic
found on the premises, himself observed
that it was a remarkable fact in the case,
and which, it appeared to him, told most
favorably than otherwise for the prisoner,
as in the whole case, from first to last, there

346

THE FLY-PAPER EPISODE

was no evidence at all that she had bought
any poison, or had anything to do with the
procuring of any, with the exception of
those fly-papers.] The accusation rests
entirely on suspicion^ insinuation^ and cir-
cumstantial suggestions ; not one tittle of
evidcTue was adduced in support of it^ and
yet the jury came to the conclusion, with-
out allowing of any doubt in the matter,
that it was her hand which administered the
poison.

How Mrs. Maybrick Accounts for the

Fly-Papers

On this question the prisoner made a
statement. She accounted for the soaking
of the fly-papers upon grounds which were
not only probable, but were corroborated
by other incidents. That she was in the
habit of using arsenic as a face wash is
shown by the prescription in 1878, before
her marriage, and of which the chemist
made an entry in his books, which came to

347

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

light, after the trial, under the following
circumstances:

Among the few articles which Mn May-
brick's brothers allowed to be taken from
the house, they being the legatees of the
deceased, was a Bible which had belonged
to Mrs. Maybrick's father, and which, with
some other relics, came into the hands of
Mrs, Maybrick's mother, the Baroness von
Roques, who, months afterward, happening
to turn over the leaves of the Bible, came
across a small piece of printed paper, evi-
dently mislaid there, being a New York
chemist's label, with a New York doctor's
prescription written on the back, for an ar-
senical face wash " for external use, to be
applied with a sponge twice a day."

This prescription contained Fowler's
solution of arsenic, chlorate of potash, rose-
water, and rectified spirits ; and was again
made up, on the 17th of July, 1878, by
a French chemist, Mr. L. Brouant, 81
Avenue D'Eylau, Paris. It corroborates
Mrs, Maybrick's statement at the trial

348

THE FLY-PAPER EPISODE

that the fly-papers were being soaked for
the purpose alleged by her. If Mrs. May-
brick had obtained or purchased the sev-
enty or eighty grains of arsenic found in
the house after the death, it is inconceiva-
ble that she should have openly manufac-
tured more arsenic with the fly-papers. At
the time she prepared the statement she
had reason to believe that the prescription
had been lost. She knew, therefore, it
would be impossible for her to corroborate
her story about the face wash, and she
could have omitted that incident alto-
gether, and contented herself by saying
that she learned the preparation while at
school in Germany.

[In further explanation I desire to state
that during my girlhood, as well as subse-
quently, I suffered occasionally, due to gas-
tric causes, from an irritation of the skin.
One of my schoolmates, observing that it
troubled me a good deal, offered me a face
lotion of her own preparation, explaining
that it was much more difficult to obtain

349

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

an arsenical ingredient abroad than in
America, and to avoid any consequent an-
noyance she extracted the necessary small
quantity of arsenic by the soaking of fly-
papers. I had never had occasion to do so
myself, as I had a prescription from Dr.
Bay; but when I discovered that I had
mislaid or lost this, I recalled the method
of my friend, being, however, wholly igno-
rant of what quantity might be required.
The reason why I wanted a cosmetic at
this time was that I was going to a fancy
dress ball with my husband's brother, and
that my face was at that time in an uncom-
fortable state of irritation. — F. E. M.]

Administration of Arsenic not Proved

Dealing with the question, did Mrs.
Maybrick administer the arsenic, there is
absolutely no evidence that she did. It
was not for the prisoner to prove her inno-
cence. She was seen neither to administer
the arsenic nor to put it in the food or

350

INTENT TO MURDER NOT PROVED

drink taken by the deceased, and this issue
was found against her in the absence of
any evidence in support.

Intent to Murder not Proved

Mrs. Maybrick's statement also bears
strongly upon the question of administer-
ing with intent to murder. It is equally
inconceivable that a guilty woman would
have said anything about the white powder
in the meat juice. She had nothing to
gain by making such a statement, which
could only land her in the sea of difficul-
ties without any possible benefit, and here
again the probabilities are entirely in her
favor. It is beyond a doubt that Mr. May-
brick was in the habit, or had at some time
or other been in the habit, of drugging
himself with all sorts of medicines, includ-
ing arsenic, and assumably he had ob-
tained relief from it, or he would not have
continued the practise.

Mr. Justice Stephen, in his summing-up,

351

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

animadverted in very strong terms on the
testimony of arsenic being used for cos-
metic purposes, although expert chemists
had certified to large use of arsenic for such
a purpose. An immense degree of specu-
lation must have entered the minds of the
jury before they could find as they did, and
bridge the gulf between the soaking of the
fly-papers and the death of Mr. Maybrick,
for it is quite evident that the soaking of
the fly-papers was the one connection be-
tween the arsenic and the prisoner upon
which all the subsequent events turned;
and, if that be so, the importance is seen at
once of the statement she made regarding
that incident, and conclusive evidence as to
which was subsequently found in the provi-
dentially recovered prescription.

Absence of Concealment by Prisoner

Another remarkable circumstance is the
absence of any attempt at concealment on
the prisoner's part. The fly-papers were

353

ABSENCP OF C3piJCEAL*fENT

©urchftsed Qpenly f rojn chemists who Ijipiew
tl^ Maybricl^S weli, gpd thgy were left §o^}c-
ing ip su^b 9' iflftnneF^s ^.J: pRce to vefwt^ any
suggpstipn of secrecy ; an4 hpr vpIuRt^ry
^ti*<:ement p.bout thg yfhit^ PPw4er which
sb# elaped in the me^); juice, as tp which
tKere W9S gb^qlutely no pyidencp to con-
nect her with its preggrice there, seepis iR-
GQRsistent with the thepry thie prp^ecHtipn
attempted to build uppn ^ nifpfd^rq/ffs-
Wnp^fion^s qf ^hieh the (fceurftfy w(fs ttgt

The qiigstipj} of the prispnier's gv[ilt was
pot capabk oi being reduped tp any is§He
uppji whieh the prgsgcutipp could hrjag to
bear dirept evidence ; the n>pst they were
capable of doing w^s tp show th^t the pris-
oner h^ oppoflrtunitm of administering
poison, which she ^harf4 with ^ery indi-
vidual in fh0, housf ; further, that she had
arsenic in her possession (and this wj^s an
Qiien sefr0t, as we have already e3j:p|9.ined
with reference io the fly-pap§r§); and,
lastly, that she had the ppssibility of ex-
23 3S3

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

tracting arsenic in sufficient quantities to
cause death, which was, however, extreme-
ly doubtful ; and then the prosecution tried
to complete this indirect evidence by prov-
ing that Mr. Maybrick died from arsenic
poisoning, which they signally failed to do.
The strong point of the prosecution, as
they alleged, was that a bottle of Valen-
tine's meat juice had been seen in her
hands on the night of Thursday, the 9th of
May, and she replaced it in the bedroom,
where it was afterward found by Michael
Maybrick, and analyzed by Mr. Davis, who
found half a grain of " arsenic in solution " ;
but there was no direct proof ^ such as is ab-
solutely necessary to a conviction in a crimi-
nal case, of tlie identity of the bottle seen in
Mrs. Maybrick's hands and that given to
the analyst, and there was evidence that it
had remained in the bedroom within reach
of anybody^ Mr. May brick himself included^
for eighteen hours, and did not until
the next day reach the hands of the ana-
lyst. These bottles are all alike in appear-

354

ABSENCE OF CONCEALMENT

ance, of similar turnip-like shape as the
bovril bottles now sold, and it is clear there
was more than one, because Dr. Hum-
phreys says in his evidence that on visiting
his patient on the 6th of May he found
some of the Valentine's meat extract had
made Mr. Maybrick sick, which he was not
surprised at, as it often made people sick ;
while Nurse Gore, speaking of the bottle
seen in the hands of Mrs. Maybrick, said
it was 2L/resh^ unused bottle ^ which she had
herself opened only an hour before.

No evidence was given of what became
of the opened bottle, and the presence of
the arsenic having already been accounted
for, and the fact recorded . that the meat
juice was not given to Mr. Maybrick, there
is nothing to add to what has already been
said, except that the account exactly dove-
tails with the prisoner's own voluntary
statement.

Can any one, closely following the evi-
dence throughout, fail to be impressed with
the inconsistency of Mrs. May brick's con-

355

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

duct in notation to her husband's illness
with a desire to murder him ? In all re-
corded cases of poisoning, the utmost pre^
cautions to screen the victim from observa-
tion have been observed. In the present
instance it would seem as if just the reverse
object had been aimed at. We find the
prisdner^ry/ giving the alarm about the at^
tack of illness; first sending for the doc-
tors, brothers, and friends; first suggest*
ing that something taken by her husband,
some drug or medicine, was at the bottom
of the mischief. We find the very first
thing she does is to administer a mustard
emetic — the last thing one would have ex-
pected if there had been a desire to poison
him. If the prisoner had wished to put
everybody in the house ^ and the doctors them^
selves^ on the scent of poison^ she could not
have acted differently.

[See also " Mrs. Maybrick's Own Analy*
sis of the Meat-Juice Incident," page 366.]

356

IMPORTANT DEDUCTIONS

Some Important Deductions from
Medical Testimojsty

FROM Dr. Humphreys' testimony it
appears that, after the days when he
was away from the patient, and when Mrs.
Maybrick had undisturbed accees to her
husband, no symptoms whatever of arsenu
cal Poisoning appeared. If, then, arsenic
was administered by Mrs. Maybrick under
the doctors' eyes, without their detecting
it, what value can attach to the testimmiy
of the medical attendants as to the cauge of
4eath, apart from the post-mortem exami*-
nation, by which thi^y practically admit they
allowed their judgment to be governed ?

Does not the only alternative present it-
self that Drs. Humphreys and Carter are
driven to the admission: "That the de-
ceased died of arsenical poisoning we de-
duce, not from the symptoms during lije,
but from the fact that arsenic was found in
the body after death " ?

357

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

Symptoms Due to Poisonous Drugs

From the medical testimony it appears
that the following list of poisonous drugs
was prescribed and administered to Mr,
Maybrick shortly before his death :

April 28, 1899^ diluted prussic acid;
April 29, Papaine's iridin; May 3, morphia
suppository; May 4, ipecacuanha; May 5,
prussic acid; May 6, Fowler's solution of
arsenic; May 7, jaborandi tincture and an-
tipyrin; May io,sulfonal, cocain,and phos-
phoric acid. ^

Also, during the same period, the fol-
lowing were prescribed: bismuth, double
doses ; nitro-glycerin ; cascara ; nitro-hydro-
chloric acid (composed of nux vomica,
strychnin, and brucine); Plummer's pills
(containing antimony and calomel); bro-
mide of potassium; tincture of hyoscya-
mus ; tincture of henbane ; chlorin.

Now it will be observed that up to May
6, when Fowler's solution of arsenic was
administered, no symptom whatever had

358

DEATH FROM NATURAL CAUSE

been observed at all compatible with the
effects of arsenic.

The sickness produced by the morphia
continued after the taking of arsenic, and
down the unfortunate man's throat prussic
acid, papaine, iridin, morphia, ipecacuanha,
and arsenic, some of the most powerful
drugs known to the pharmacopoeia, had
found their way by the advice of Dr. Hum-
phreys, in less than a week, while he was
told to eat nothing, and allay his thirst with
a damp cloth ; and the charge of poisoning
is made against the prisoner because he is
suggested to have had an irritant poison
in his stomach, and minute traces of ar-
senic in some other organs, within five
days afterward.

Death from Natural Causes

The whole history of the case, from its
medical aspect, is consistent with the small
quantity of arsenic found in the body
being part of that prescribed by Dr. Hum-

359

ANALYSIS OF^ tkE UAYtKlClL CASE

phreys, or the t-efflaitt§ of that tafen by
the deceased himself, ^Aere bHnj^ no pdf^
tick df ividefic^ to shdW that he di^cohiifiued
the habit of d^uigiHg hifhself tilnib^i Up to
the day of his diaik. Thig Is also ifl dccdfd
with the evidence of Dr. Carter, wha at-'
teilded at a later peHod, arid, takeii as; a
whdle, the eViderice of both of theSe dOc^
tors, as well as their treatftifehf of the de-
ceased, points to death ffdifi fidturUl cthise^.

Prosecution's Deductions from Post-
mortem Analysis Misleading

The eVidehce df the pfoseetititrh ifl dori-
nectiotl tvlth the ahalySiS was thofdughly
unreliable and misleading. Df. SteVeti-
son's difficulty was that, while two grains
of arsenic was the smallest quantity capable
of killing, the analyst had found only one-
tehth di a gfam, of the twentieth part of

the sniallest fatal dd§e, and, iti sttbstatide,

Df. Stevenson pfodeeds tO argue a§ fdl-
IdwS:

posT-mohtem analysis

ia) I found 0.di5 grain of ai^ftie in 8
ottndefe of ititestiiies* (Ther^ is tto fecord
as to tfhfit pkvt ctf the intestines he ex^m^
itied.) I hdve weighed the itltestilfte*; df
some othet pefsfott (hot Mt. Maybri(:k)i
and find their entire Weight to be So ttiueh.
If, then, 8 Ounces of Mr. Mftybrick'S intes^
tines yield 0.015 grairij the entire ifttestirfes
(calculated from the weight of some one
else's intestines), had 1 analyzed therttj
Would have yielded otie^elevetlth of a graift*

(d) Dr* Stevensoti thert proceeds to argue :
" I found did36 grain of arsetiitl iii 4 ounces

of liver. The entire litter weighed 48

ounces, th&nfofe the entire tivef- c&niaiMd

O.J 2 grain ofatsehitr

(c) Dr. StevensOti afgUes further: "The
intestines and liver, therefore, Uiay be taken
to contain together four-tenths of a graitl Of
arsenic, and, havitig found four^tenths of a
grain, I assume that the body at the time of
death probably contained a Jfatal dose oj ar-

senic.

Such wfl& the deductioft Dr. SteveusOh

36 1

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

arrived at, necessitating the assumption that
arsenic was equally distributed in the in-
testines and liver ^ whereas it is within the
personal knowledge of eminent men (such
as Drs. Tidy and Macnamara) that arsenic
may be found after death in one portion of
the intestines^ and not a trace of it in a7ty
other part. That in arsenical poisoning
the arsenic may be found in the rectum
and in the duodenum, and in no other
part, is beyond dispute, and the fallacy of
Dr. Stevenson^ s process must be self-evident.

The witnesses for the prosecution them-
selves supply the proof of the unequal dis-
tribution of the arsenic in the liver.

Mr. Davies calculates the quantity in the
whole liver as 0.130 grain.

Dr. Stevenson, in his first experiment,
puts it at 0.312 grain, and in his second ex-
periment at 0.278 grain; in other words.
Dr. Stevenson finds double in one experi-
ment and considerably more than double
in another experiment^ the quantity found
by Mr. Davies^ and it is upon this glaring

362

RECAPITULATION OF LEGAL POINTS

miscalculation and discrepancy that the case
for the Prosecution was made to rest, and
Mrs. Maybrick was convicted.

But with all this miscalculation the ap-
proximate amount of arsenic can only be
swelled up to four-tenths of a grain^ less
than one fourth of a fatal dosCy and it was
demonstrated that every other part of the
body, urine, bile, stomach, contents of
stomach, heart, lungs, spleen, fluid from
mouth, and even bones, were all found to
be free from arsenic.

Recapitulation of Legal Points

The legal points of the case may thus
conveniently be recapitulated under the
following short heads :

There was no conclusive evidence that
Mr. Maybrick died from other than natural
causes (the word " conclusive *' being used
in the sense oi free from doubt).

There was no conclusive evidence that
he died from arsenical poisoning.

363

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

There was no evidence that the prisoner
administered or attempted to administer
arsenic to him.

There was no evidence that the pris-
oner, if she did administer or attempt to
administer arsenic, did so with intent to
murder.

The judge, while engaged in his sum^
ming-up, placed himself in a position where
his mind was open to the influence ojF pub-
lic discussion and prejudice, to which was
probably attributable the evident change in
his summing-up between the first and sec-
ond days ; and he ako assumed facts against
the prisoner which were not proved.

The jury were allowed to separate and
frequent places of public resort and enter-
tainment during such summing-up.

The verdict was against the weight of
evidence.

The jury did not give the prisoner the
benefit of the doubt suggested by the dis-
agreement of expert witnesses on a material
issue in the case.

364

RECAPITULATION OF LEGAL POINTS

The Home Secretary should have re-
mitted the entire sentence by reason of his
being satisfied that there existed a reason-
able doubt of her guilty which, had it been
taken into consideration at the time, would
have entitled her to an acquittal.

The indictment contained no specific
account of felonious administration of poi-
son, and consequently the jury found the
prisoner guilty of an offense for which she
was never tried.

365

MRS. MAYBRICK'S OWN ANALYSIS

Of the Meat-juice Incident

I SAID in my statement to the Court, regarding^ this
meat juice, that : " On Thursday night, the 9th, after
Nurse Gore had given my husband beef juice, I went and
sat on the bed by the side of him. He complained to me
of feeling very sick, very weak, and very depressed, and
again implored me to give him a powder, which he had
referred to early in the evening and which I had then de-
clined to give him. I was overwrought, terribly anxious,
miserably unhappy, and his evident distress utterly im-
nerved me. He told me the powder would not harm
him, and that I could put it in his food. I then con-
sented. My lord, I had not one true or honest friend in
the house. I had no one to consult and no one to advise
me. I was deposed from my position as mistress in my
own house and from the position of attending on my own
husband, notwithstanding that he was so ill. Notwith-
standing the evidence of nurses and servants, I may say
that he wished to have me with him. [This desire was
corroborated by the testimony of Nurse Gallery.] He
missed me whenever I was not with him. Whenever I
went out of the room he asked for me, and for four days
before he died I was not allowed to give him even a piece
of ice without its being taken from my hand. When I
found the powder I took it into the inner room, and in

366

THE MEAT-JUICE INCIDENT

pushing through the door I upset the bottle, and, in order
to make up the quantity of fluid spilled, I added a con-
siderable quantity of water. On returning to the room I
found my husband asleep, and I placed the bottle on the
table by the window. When he awoke he had a choking
sensation in his throat and vomiting. After that he ap-
peared a little better. As he did not ask for the powder
again, and as I was not anxious to give it to him, I re-
moved the bottle from the small table, where it would
attract his attention, to the top of the washstand, where
he could not see it. There I left it until I believe Mr.
Michael Maybrick took possession of it. Until a few
minutes before Mr. Bryning made the terrible charge
against me, no one in that house had informed me of the
fact that a death certificate had been refused, or that a
post-mortem examination had taken place, or that there
was any reason to suppose that my husband died from
other than natural causes. It was only when Mrs. Briggs
alluded to the presence of arsenic in the meat juice that I
was made aware of the [supposed] nature of the powder
my husband had asked me to give him. I then attempted
to make an explanation to Mrs. Briggs, such as I am now
making to your lordship, when a policeman interrupted
the conversation and put a stop to it."

Some time after my conviction there
was found among my effects a prescrip-
tion for a face wash containing arsenic
(the existence of which Justice Stephen in
his summing up flouted as an invention of
mine to cover an intent to poison). This,
together with the fact that on analysis no

367

ANAI^YglS QF THE jyiAYBRICK CASE

tFace of " fiber " was discovered iji the body
or in apy of the things containing poisqn
found in the house, 3hould rentoya the
'^fly-paper incident*^ ffoni all sepous con-
sideration in its bearing on the ewe (al-
though it ^yas the source of all " suspicions "

before death)..

There remain only as "circumstantial
gyicjenpe pf guilt" \yhat has CQm§ tQ bg
known as the " motive,*' and the Valentine^s
ni^^t-juicp ir)ici(}enf;. The " rnofiye," j>ow-
ever regarded, was surely no incentive to
injar4Pr» ^ jn^ipuch if | wanted to t>e ff^
there was sufficient evidence in my posses-
sipn (jn the nature of infidelity an4 cnjejty)
to secure a divorce, and it was with regard
to steps in that direction that I had already

taken that I made ponfession to my hus-

bftncj ^ter ojjr reppijcjjiatjpn, snd to whic^
I referfed as tp the "wrong" I h{j4 done
him> l^ecause of th§ publipity ^^4 f^l^ to
his busip^s it iijvolyed. T^ "motive,"
which vvas ii>trp4jjced into the casq in tfifi
form of § \§mr wntten hy me on tH§ 8th of

3#!B

THE

NEW YORK

PUBLIC LIBRARY

Astor, Lenox and TMden^
Foundations.

THE MEAT-JUICE INCIDENT

May, in which I said that my husband was
" sick unto death," was made much of by
the prosecution, and it led Justice Stephen
to say, in his summing-up, " that I could not
have known that my husband was dying
(except I knew something others did not
suspect), inasmuch as the doctors, from the
diagnosis, did not consider the case at all
serious." The justice either did not or
would not understand (though it was testi-
fied to) that the phrase, " sick unto death,"
is an American colloquialism, especially of
the South, and commonly employed with
reference to any illness at all serious.
Aside from the fact that all in attendance
(save and except the doctors per their med-
ical testimony) did regard it as serious —
a witness for the prosecution, Mrs. Briggs,
testified that she regarded him on that
day as " dangerously ill," and Mr. Michael
Maybrick said that when he saw his broth-
er on the evening of the same day " he was
shocked by his appearance" — I may say
here that the phrase " sick unto death," in
24 369

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

connection with other causes for apprehen-
sion, was prompted by the fact that my
husband had told me that very morning
that "he thought he was going to die";
and that this was his feeling is conclusively
shown by the evidence of Dr. Humphreys
at the inquest, when he testified that he
had remarked to Mr. Michael Maybrick on
this same Wednesday, the 8th of May : " I
am not satisfied with your brother, and I
will tell you why [not because the symp-
toms seemed serious to him, it will be ob-
served] • Your brother tells me he is going
to diey

That I regarded the case as really serious
is surely further supported by the fact that,
notwithstanding the easy-going attitude of
Dr. Humphreys, I had persisted in urging
a consultation, which accordingly took
place on the 7th. As to what the attend-
ing physicians knew or did not know about
the medical aspects of the case, I confi-
dently refer the reader to their own re-
markable testimony.

370

THE MEAT-JUICE INCIDENT

There then remains for serious consider-
ation only what is known as the " Valen-
tine meat-juice incident," Of this I know
no more now than is included in my state-
ment at the trial — namely, that at my hus-
band's urgent, piteous request I placed a
powder (which by his direction I took from
a pocket in his vest, hanging in the adjoin-
ing room, which room until his sickness
had been his private bedroom, he having
been removed to mine as being larger and
more airy) in a bottle of meat juice, no part
of the contents of which were given him,
and hence at the very most there could
only have legally arisen from this act a
charge of " intent to poison."

I do not assume that I can solve a prob-
lem that has puzzled so many able minds,
but I trust I shall make clear that the
prosecution can not acquit itself of the
inference of " cooking " up a case against
me with reference to this meat-juice in-
cident :

I. At the inquest, only a few davs after

371

J I

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

the occurrence, Nurse Gore testified, "I
could and did see clearly what Mrs. May-
brick did with the bottle," though she
failed to tell what she saw; and it is re-
markable she was not further questioned
on this point. At the magisterial inquiry
and trial. Per contra, she testified that " she
[I] pushed the door to conceal (note the
animus) her [my] movements"; but on
cross-examination she so far corrected her-
self as to say : " Mrs. Maybrick did not shut
the dressing-room door."

2. When I returned with the bottle to
the sick-room, she testified that I placed it
on the table in a " surreptitious mannerl'
though this action, according to her own
testimony, happened while " she [I] raised
her right hand and replaced the bottle on
the table, while she [I] was talking to me
[her]."

If one wanted to do such an act " sur-
reptitiously," would one choose the mo-
ment of all others when by conversation
one is calling attention to oneself? Do

372

THE MEAT-JUICE INCIDENT

not the two things involve a direct contra-
diction ?

3. It is in evidence that an hour after I
had placed the bottle on a little table in the
window, I returned to the room and re-
moved it from the table to the washstand
(where it remained during most of the next
day), lest the sight of it should renew
Mr. Maybrick's desire for it, as he had
just awakened. Note how this bottle is
juggled with by the witnesses for the pros-
ecution.

Michael Maybrick, at the inquest, in an-
swer to the question, " Where did you find
the Valentine's meat juice?" replied: "I
found it on a little table mixed up with sev-
eral other bottlesl' Note the particularity
of this bottle being mixed up with several
other bottles. Obviously he at this time,
only a few days after the event, had a clear
picture of the situation in his mind. In
corroboration of this testimony that the
bottle he took was on the table and not on
the washstand, there is the testimony of

373

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

Nurse Gallery, who at the inquest stated:
" My attention was called by her [Nurse
Gore] to a bottle of Valentine's meat juice,
which was on a table in Mr. Maybrick's
room. I took a sample. I don't know
what became of the bottle of meat juice. I
saw Mr. Michael Maybrick in the room be-
fore going off duty at 4.50 p.m. on Friday,
but did not see him take the meat juice
away.*'

Nurse Gore gave her testimony at the
inquest after the two others, and deposed
that Mr. Michael Maybrick took the bottle
from the washstand where I had placed it,
thus contradicting Michael Maybrick, and
in a way also Nurse Gallery, who testified
that Nurse Gore called her attention to a
bottle on the small table. Obviously this
difference introduces two bottles ; but this
would never answer the prosecution, and
accordingly Mr. Michael Maybrick at the
trial dropped the ta^le sworn to at the in-
quest and fell in line with Nurse Gore in
so far as to say : " It was standing on the

374

THE MEAT-JUICE INCIDENT

waskstand, and it was among some other
bottles^ Note that, while he substitutes the
washstandiox the table ^h^ still clings to the
bottles — a most important circumstance — as
it was indubitably shown that there were
on the washstand only the " ordinary basins
and jugs " (water pitchers). Obviously Mr.
Michael Maybrick had not fully compre-
hended the purpose of the prosecution in
" harmonizing " the testimony with that of
Nurse Gore ; the " bottles " were too clearly
in his mind to be dropped without a distinct
efiFort, and he naturally introduced them
again ; and, to fit in with the Nurse- Gore
and the amended Mr. Michael Maybrick
evidence, Nurse Gallery also changed front
at the trial, and the table of her inquest tes-
timony is also turned into a washstand. It
is in evidence that as late as the 6th of May
my husband took meat juice out of a bottle
then in the room, the contents of which,
however, did not agree with him, and upon
the order of Dr. Humphreys its giving was
discontinued, he adding that he was " not

375

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

surprised," as it was known not to agree
with some people.

Although this was the doctor's order,
Mr. Edwin Maybrick took it upon himself
to procure a fresh bottle, and, distinctly
against the same order, Nurse Gore set
about to administer its contents. Subse-
quently a bottle of meat juice, half full, was
found in a small wooden box with other
bottles (one of them containing arsenic in
solution) in my husband's hat-box.

Nevertheless, though we are here unde-
niably dealing with three meat-juice bot-
tles, only two were accounted for at the
trial. What became of the third bottle?
And which of the three ^2^ missing? Now,
furthermore, it is in evidence that Nurse
Gallery handled one of these bottles (be-
tween the time that I placed one on the
washstand and the time when Mr. Michael
Maybrick, more than twelve hours later,
took one either from the table or the washr
stand for analysis), for she took a sample of
it, which she afterward threw away,

376

THE MEAT-JUICE INCIDENT

As all Valentine's meat -juice bottles
look alike, Mr. Michael Maybrick showed
sufficient caution to say he could not iden-
tify the bottle shown him ; but Nurse Gore,
to whom every act of mine, however inno-
cent, was fraught with " surreptitiousness "
and " suspicion," balked at no such scru-
ples, but boldly testified that the bottle pro-
duced in court was the identical one that
Mr. Michael Maybrick "took from the
washstand," even though at the inquest,
when his memory was freshest, he testified
that he took it from the table.

It should be remembered that my state-
ment to the court was to the effect that I
put a powder (its nature unknown to me)
in the meat-juice bottle I had in my hands.
Yet no bottle containing a powder, or in
which a powder had been dissolved, ap-
peared in evidence. According to the
analyst, the bottle submitted to him con-
tained arsenic that had been put in in a
state of solution. Now it resolves itself to
this : either I uttered a falsehood about the

377

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

powder and really introduced a solution,
or another bottle was substituted for the
one I had for two minutes in my pos-
session.

The contention of the prosecution was
that I " invented " the powder, precisely as it
was contended I " invented " the face-wash
prescription which was found after the trial.
If I "invented" the powder, how did I
come by the solution ? If I had had arsenic
in solution in my possession, would I have
gone to the trouble of making a solution
for a face wash by the clumsy method of
soaking fly-papers ? Is not the proposition
quite absurd on its face — that I should
openly call attention to a method of arsenic
extraction with the object of murder, when
I already had the means at my command ?

Finally, let it be borne in mind, as stated
by Justice Stephen himself as a remarkable
fact, that no arsenic was traced to my pro-
curement or found in my personal belong-
ings (save and except the innocuous fly-
papers), and I may add that no arsenic was

378

THE MEATJUICE INCIDENT

traced to any one connected with the case,
except to my husband.

I say it is absolutely clear that the bot-
tle of Valentine's meat juice which Mr.
Michael Maybrick took possession of and
handed to Dr. Carter is not the same bottle
which Nurse Gore saw me place on the
washstand. There should be no flaw in
the identity of the bottle which was handed
to the analyst and the one which was in
my hands, and I think the reader will say
that it is impossible to conceive a greater
flaw in any evidence of identity than shown
by these witnesses of the prosecution at the
inquest, when their minds were freshest as
to their respective parts in this incident,
and at the trial.

Those of my readers who follow the
analysis of the testimony as presented by
Messrs. Lumley & Lumley can hardly have
failed to be impressed by the fact that
I was surrounded by unscrupulous ene-
mies, by people who not only had extraor-
dinary knowledge as to where to look for

379

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

deposits of arsenic, but also remarkable in-
tuitions that arsenic had been administered
before any evidence of the presence of poi-
son had been analytically proven.

In the above I have not aimed to make
an analysis of the testimony, such as, for
example, on the evidence now available,
Lord Russell could have made; I have
simply endeavored to satisfy my readers
that I have substantial grounds for assert-
ing my innocence before the world.

Florence Elizabeth Maybrick.

380

MEMORIALS FOR RESPITE OF

SENTENCE

From the Physicians of Liverpool

IN a memorial for respite of sentence of
Mrs. Maybrick, which was signed by
leading medical practitioners of Liverpool,
the petitioners say in part :

" 3. It was admitted by the medical testi-
mony on behalf of the prosecution that the
symptoms during life and the post-mortem
appearances were in themselves insuffi-
cient to justify the conclusion that death
was caused by arsenic, and that it was only
the discovery of traces of that poison in
certain parts of the viscera which eventu-
ally led to that conclusion.

" 4. The arsenic so found in the viscera
was less in quantity than that found in any
previous case of arsenical poisoning in
which arsenic has been found at alL

381

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

"S. There was indisputable evidence on
the part of the defense that the deceased
had been in the habit of taking arsenic,
both medicinally and otherwise, for many
years, and that the small quantity found in
the viscera was inconsistent with the the-
ory of a fatal dose at any time or times
during the period covered by the illness of
the deceased.

"6. Lastly, your memorialists agree with
the evidence given by Dr. Tidy, Dr. Mac-
namara, and Mr. Paul on behalf of the
defense, that the medical evidence on be-
half of the prosecution had entirely failed
to prove that the death was due to arsenical
poisoning at all**

From the Bars of Lfverpool and

London

Leading members of the Bars of Liver-
pool and London signed a memorial pray-
ing a reprieve of Mrs. Maybrick's sentence
" on the ground ... of the great conflict
of medical testimony as to the cause of
death " of Mr. Maybrick.

382

MEMORIALS

From Citizens of Liverpool

A petition for reprieve of Mrs. May-
brick's sentence was signed by many and
influential citizens of Liverpool. Among
the reasons urged were :

3. Lack of direct evidence of administra-
tion of arsenic.

4. The weak case against prisoner on
general facts unduly prejudiced by evi-
dence of motive.

5. Preponderance of medical testimony
that death was ascribable to natural causes.

[I feel a deep respect for the noble avowal given in the
petition of the medical practitioners of Liverpool, who
must have felt the honor of their profession at stake, and
that their individual dignity and humanity were concerned.
The feeling among the Bar on receipt of the verdict was
an almost universal, if not a quite unanimous, one of sur-
prise. I have already mentioned (in Part One, the change
of attitude of the citizens of Liverpool toward me, as the
trial progressed, from hostility to belief in my innocence.
— F. E. M.]

383

NEW EVIDENCE
Arsenic Sold to Maybrick by Druggist

MR. EDWIN GARNETT HEA-
TON, a retired chemist (druggist),
formerly carried on business at 14 Ex-
change Street East, Liverpool, for seven-
teen years; he retired from business in
1888. He testified at the trial:

" Mr. Maybrick called frequently at my.
shop for about ten years or more, off and
on. He used to get the tonic called ' pick-
me-up.' He would come to the shop, get
it, and drink it up. He gave me a pre-
scription which altered it, which I put up
with liquor arsenicalis. He brought the
prescription for the first few times ; I used
afterward to give it him at once, when he
came into the shop and gave his order. I
prepared the ' pick-me-up ' and added the
stuff. At the beginning of giving it to

384

ARSENIC SOLD TO MAYBRICK

him, a certain quantity of liquor arsenicalis
was given, and as it continued it was grad-
ually increased from first to last, so at the
last it was 75 per cent, greater in quantity
than it was originally. He used to get it
from two to five times a day, and each con-
taining 75 per cent, increase."

This testimony of Mr. Heaton's was
challenged by the prosecution, and con-
siderably nullified by the fact that he did
not know Mr. Maybrick, his customer, by
name, but identified him by a photograph.
To show how inexorably one fatality after
another was woven into the web of my
tragic case, it is in order to state that Mr.
Heaton's connection with Mr. Maybrick
could and would undoubtedly have been
perfectly established but for what in the
circumstances can be characterized only as
a criminal blunder on the part of the police.
In the printed police list of the score or
more medicine bottles found locked in the
private desk of Mr. Maybrick at his office
was one entered as follows : " Spirit of sal-
n 385

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

volatile, Edwin G. Easton, Exchange Street
East, Liverpool." This misprint of Easton
for Heaton escaped the attention of every-
body at the trial, and thus prevented the
defense from identifying most circumstan-
tially Mr. Maybrick with Mr. Heaton's cus-
tomer who had the arsenic habit

Arsenic Supplied to Maybrick by
Manufacturing Chemist

About ten years ago Mr. Valentine
Charles Blake, of Victoria Embankment,
son of a well-known baronet and Member
of Parliament, made a voluntary statutory
declaration [corroborated on oath in every
possible essential by William Bryer Nation,
of No. 7 Lion Street, a manufacturing
chemist and patentee] , that Mr. Maybrick,
about two months before his death, pro-
cured through him (Mr. Blake), from Mr.
Nation's supplies, as much as 150 grains of
arsenic in various forms. Mr. Nation, as-
sisted by Mr. Blake, had made certain

386

ARSENIC SUPPLIED TO MAYBRICK

chemical experiments in preparing ramie,
the fiber of rhea grass, to serve as a substi-
tute for cotton. Among other ingredients
used was arsenic, some in pure form (white
arsenic), some mixed with soot, and some
mixed with charcoal. In January, 1889,
the process was perfected, and some time
during the same month Mr. Nation sent
Mr. Blake to see Mr. Maybrick, to get his
assistance in placing the product on the
market. Mr. Maybrick was interested in
the proposition and inquired closely into
the nature of the process, what ingredients
were used, etc. The deponent told him
that, among other materials, arsenic was
employed.

Then, to quote the exact words of the
deposition, Mr. Blake went on to say:

" 14. The said Mr. Maybrick shortly af-
terward, during discussion at the same in-
terview, asked me whether I had heard
that many inhabitants of Styria, in Aus-
tria, habitually took arsenic internally and
throve upon it. I said that I had heard so.

387

^ I

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

He then spoke to me of De Quincey, the
author of * Confessions of an Opium-Eater/
and asked me had I read the work. I said,
'Yes/ and that I wondered De Quincey
could have taken such a quantity as 900
drops of laudanum in a day. The said
James Maybrick said, * One man's poison
is another man's meat, and there is a so-
called poison which is like meat and liquor
to me whenever I feel weak and depressed.
It makes me stronger in mind and in body
at once,' or words to that effect. I ven-
tured to ask him what it was. He an-
swered, ' I don't tell everybody, and
wouldn't tell you, only you mentioned ar-
senic. It is arsenic. I take it when I can
get it, but the doctors won't put any into
my medicine except now and then a trifle,
that only tantalizes me,' or words to that
effect. After a pause, during which I said
nothing, the said James Maybrick said:
* Since you use arsenic, can you let me have
some ? I find a diflBculty in getting it here.'
I answered that I had some by me, and
that, since I had only used it for experi-
ments which were now perfected, I had no
further use for it, and he (Maybrick) was

388

ARSENIC SUPPLIED TO MAYBRICK

welcome to all I had left. He then asked
me what it was worth, and offered to pay
for it in advance. I replied that I had no
license to sell drugs, and suggested that we
should make it a quid pro quo. Mr. May-
brick was to do his best with the ramie
grass product, and I was to make him a
present of the arsenic I had.

" 15. It was finally agreed that when I
came to Liverpool again, as arranged I
should bring with me and hand him the ar-
senic aforesaid.

" 16. In Februetry, 188 g, I again called
at the office of the said James Maybrick, in
Liverpool, and, as promised, I handed him
all the arsenic I had at my command,
amounting to about 150 grains, some of
the ' white ' and some of the two kinds of
* black ' arsenic, in three separate paper
packets. I told him to be careful, as he
had * almost enough to poison a regiment.'
When we separated the said James May-
brick took away the said arsenic with him,
saying he was going home to his house at
Aigburth, to which he invited me. Hav-
ing a train to catch, I declined the invita-
tion, promising to accept it on my next

389

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

visit to Liverpool, but before that occurred
I read of his death.

" 17. After the wife of the said James
Maybrick had been accused of his alleged
murder, I wrote to Mr. Cleaver, her then
solicitor, of Liverpool, to the effect that I
could give some evidence which might be
of use to his client, and I posted such letter
but received no reply.

" 18. At this time I was intensely anx-
ious as to the fate of my only son, Valen-
tine Blake, who had in the previous year
sailed on board the ship Melanasta from
South Shields for Valparaiso, which ship
was then very long overdue and unheard
of. I eventually learned, as a result of a
Board of Trade inquiry, that the said ship
must have foundered with all hands, my
only son included. At the time I wrote as
aforesaid to Mr. Cleaver, my entire atten-
tion was engrossed in endeavoring to get
news as to the ship which never came home,
and I felt little interest in any other sub-
ject. Receiving no reply to my said letter
to Mr. Cleaver, I took no further steps in
the matter until, seeing recently in a newsr
paper that Mr. Jonathan £. Harris, of 95

390

MAYBRlCk*S ARSENIC HABIT

Leadenhall Street, in the city of London,
was now acting for Mrs. James Maybrick
and her mother, the Baroness de Roques, I
called at the offices of the said Mr. Harns
and made to him a statement/'

Depositions as to Mr. Maybrick's

Arsenic Habit

On August lo, Henry Bliss, former pro-
prietor of Sefton Club and Chambers,
Liverpool, made a sworn deposition, in
which he said :

" Mr. Maybrick lived in the chambers on
and off several months, and was in the
habit of dosing himself. On one occasion
he asked me to leave a prescription at a
well-known Liverpool chemist's to be made
up by the time he left 'Change. The
chemist remarked : * He ought to be very
careful and not take an overdose of it.'

On March 31, 1891, Franklin George
Bancroft, artist and writer, of Columbia,

391

ANALYSIS OF tHE MAYBRICK CASE

S. C„ made a sworn deposition, in which

he said :

" I. Between the years 1874 and 1876 I
was personally acquainted with James
Maybrick, late of Battlecrease House, Aig-
burth, near Liverpool, merchant, deceased,
who was then living in Norfolk, Va, I was

frequently in his company^ and from time
to time I have seen hint take from his vest
pQck^t a case resembling a cigarette case,
which contg^ined a packet q/ white powders,
and place the contents of one such powder
on several occasions into the glass of wine
(usually Chablis, claret, or champagne) he
was at the time drinking, and swallow the
same.

** 2. Seeing him take this powder, I did,
on one occasion, ask him what it was, and
the said James Maybrick replied, ' Longev-
ity and fair complexion, my boy f ' and he
subsequently informed me that the said
white powders were composed of arsenic
among other ingredients/*

392

JUSTICE STEPHEN'S RETIREMENT

Justice Stephen's Retirement

There are also facts in relation to the
judge who tried the case which, had they
been anticipated at the time of the trial,
could not have failed to have had some
weight, directly or indirectly, on the minds
of the jury ; that is to say, his retirement
from the Bench not long afterward, in
April, 1 89 1, when, to quote his own words
in addressing the Bar, of whom he was tak-
ing leave, " he had been made acquainted
with the fact that he was regarded by some
as no longer physically capable of discharg-
ing his duties " ; and it will be no matter of
surprise, to those who have read critically
the summing-up of Mr. Justice Stephen on
this trial, to notice the entire change from
a favorable bias between his address to the
jury on the first days of the trial to the vio-
lent hostility shown at its conclusion.

This change of front can be in a manner
accounted for» as it had been suggested to
the prisoner's friends, by a conversation on

393

ANALYSIS OF THE MAYBRICK CASE

the case between Mr. Justice Stephen and
another member of the Bench, Mr. Justice
Grantham, at a social meeting of an en-
tirely private character.

A mental malady was developed in the
judge so soon after the trial that it was
properly said to have been caused by his
brooding over it^ and this condition in-
creased so rapidly and markedly that his
resignation was demanded. It is but rea-
sonable to suppose that the judge's mental
incapacity reached farther back than its
discovery, and that the illogical and unjust
summing-up was connected with the men-
tal overthrow of the otherwise able judge.
And it may be here added that Justice Ste-
phen himself, in the second edition of the
"General Views of the Criminal Law of
England, 1890," says, at page 173, that out
of 979 cases tried before him, from Janu-
ary, 1885, to September, 1889, "the case of
Mrs. Maybrick was the only case in which
there could be any doubt about thefacts,">/

394

THE NEW YORK PUBLIC UBRARY
RBPBRBNGB DBPARTMBNT

This book is under no etroomatnnooa to bo
taken from tbo BaildJnj

fvrm «•

•f\

■■* «

.* . ^